SH 222 
"^ ^^ No. 1775 

1916 ^===^^^=:===z====^=^=r=zrr= 

Copy 1 



SPECIAL REPORT 



BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON FISHERIES AND GAME 



RELATIVE TO THE 



Fish and Fisheries of Buzzaeds Bay. 



January, 191 



BOSTON: 

WRIGHT & POTTER PRINTING CO., .STATE PRINTERS, 

32 DERNE STREET. 

1916. 






Of 



/—/ •? rt *^ 
/ / -^ Ju A^ 












CI)e Commontoealtl) of ^asgacbusctts. 



Commissioners on Fisheries and Game, 

SiATE House, Boston, Jan. 11, 1916. 

To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives. 

We herewith transmit a special report upon the investigation 
of the fishery conditions in Buzzards Bay, as ordered by chap- 
ter 104, Resolves of 1913; chapter 44, Resolves of 1914; and 
chapter 19, Resolves of 1915. 



Respectfully submitted, 



G. W. FIELD, 

Chairman. 



Ci)e Commontoealtib of ^a0isaci)usett0. 



Special Eeport relative to the Buzzards Bay 

Fisheries. 



In considering the problem of Buzzards Bay it is essential 
first to consider to what extent Buzzards Bay can be made to 
contribute to a definite and regular fish supply placed upon the 
market in sanitary condition, in favorable competition with 
flesh and fowl. Buzzards Bay is, beyond question, a breeding 
place for many valuable species, of which further detail is given 
later. The preservation of Buzzards Bay as a breeding ground 
is essential and possible. In order to secure the most satisfac- 
tory results in the briefest time, it is necessary, first of all, to 
remove the largest possible number of fish the presence of 
which is prejudicial to the increase of the most valuable species; 
secondly, the largest possible number of breeding fish of the 
most satisfactory varieties must be maintained; thirdly, the 
conditions must be made as favorable as possible for rearing, in 
the shortest possible time, the largest possible number of young 
fish of these valuable species. In order to do this, some atten- 
tion must be given to the kinds of species present, for the rea- 
son that certain species are mutually exclusive. I'here is always 
present in the bay a sufficient quantity of fundamental food, 
e.g., plankton, consisting chiefly of microscopic planes and ani- 
mals, including their eggs and young, to rear a large quantity 
of the less valuable ,fish, such as minnows, alewives, herring, 
sand eels, and others, — fish which in turn serve as food for 
raising a satisfactory number of such valuable food fish as blue- 
fish, squeteague, striped bass, pollock and others. The presence 
of sufficient quantities of the less valuable species thereby lessens 
the cannibalism among the important species. The value of 
Buzzards Bay as a State asset lies first in the fact that it is 
relatively shallow water, into which empties a large number of 



6 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

streams which are capable of producing enormous quantities of 
alewifes and similar species feeding upon microscopic plants, 
etc., and therefore furnishing all the conditions necessary for 
maintaining a fabulous quantity of valuable carnivorous fish. 
The bay is still further valuable from the fact that it is adapted 
for furnishing a ciuick supply of fish for market or for bait, as 
well as favorable conditions for recreational fishing. Its geo- 
graphical position and contour render fishing in some parts of 
the bay possible when inclement weather would preclude it in 
the open sea. 

We find that there are sixty-eight species of fish regularly in- 
habiting the bay. Of these, thirty-two are now used for food; 
nine are directly injurious, through preying upon the more val- 
uable species. Govin estimated that every pound of dogfish and 
other shark was produced at a cost of twenty pounds of other 
fish. 

We have thus far been unable to secure any reliable figures 
upon the yield per acre in the waters of the bay, but there ap- 
pears to be no reason why it should not yield in the same pro- 
portion as other bodies of water apparently less favorably situ- 
ated. As a general proposition, favorable bodies of water 
should yield in proteid food three tunes as much as an ecjual 
area of land. Neither have we been able to secure reliable 
evidence upon the annual catch per man in Buzzards Bay. In 
brief, as must be expected, we have no results at all comparable 
to those of Brandt in "Studies in the North Sea." We have no 
observations upon the survival or the migration of marked fish 
which have been liberated. 

We have collated, so far as records would permit, the catches 
made under various conditions and places in the bay, and we 
have made observations upon the quantities of fish taken and 
the number of fish unnecessarily wasted in transit from the 
water to the consumer. Our observations give us some inkling 
of the susceptibility of various species to capture by net, both 
in fixed traps or pound fishing, in gill netting, trawls and in the 
beam, now replaced by otter trawls. We have some observa- 
tions upon the serious efi^ects which result from the destruction 
of certain species on the way to the spawning ground, notably 
the case of alewives, striped bass, scup and white perch, and 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 7 

suggest that this unnecessary destruction may be lessened by 
suitable regulation of the nets, although such regulation as a 
practical matter is a difficult one to bring about. That the sus- 
ceptibility of fish to capture by nets varies with the species was 
brought out by Wemyss Fulton, who found that when 5,906 
fish of twenty-five species were taken in the pocket of an otter 
trawl, 32,237 escaped from the meshes, — that is, 19 per cent, 
were taken and 81 per cent, escaped. The otter trawl was 
found to be most deadly to fish of the flounder type, — less so 
to the haddock. Of the round fish, as high as 96 per cent, es- 
caped from the meshes. 

The species which are most susceptible to destruction in 
Buzzards Bay, and therefore to ultimate extermination, are the 
alewife, shad, striped bass, white perch, scup, squeteague and 
bluefish. Other species which appear to be taken in the traps 
but on account of their wide distribution are not seriously af- 
fected, primarily from the fact that their eggs are laid promis- 
cuously over all the surface of the ocean, both within Buzzards 
Bay and outside, are mackerel, menhaden, butterfish, bluefish 
and squeteague.^ 

The species most destructive to the more valuable fish are, 
of course, primarily, sharks and dogfish. Incidentally, skates, 
rays, pufi^ers, sea robins and other kinds should be destroyed in 
quantities. 

Much has been said both for and against the methods of trap 
fishing, but it all crystallizes into the proposition that Buzzards 
Bay, if properly handled, should furnish more fish than can 
properly and economically be taken out by hand lines; that 
certain species which can profitably be removed from the bay 
do not bite the hook, such as menhaden and butterfish in lim- 
ited quantities; that sharks and dogfish appear without doubt to 
be increasing in the bay, and therefore definite means should be 
taken for diminishing their numbers. The logical method of do- 
ing this is by a limited number of traps fished at times when it 
means the greatest destruction of the enemies of the fish with 
the least destruction of the valuable and breeding fish. This 
can best be effected by a small number of traps so distributed 

' The small squid may be beneficial in that they serve as food for large fish, while the larger 
squid may be exceedingly destructive to schools of small fish. 



8 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

as to serve in the neighborhoods remote from the important 
centers of distribution, where the food is required to meet the 
needs of the people, in this way working minimum damage to 
the productive capacity of the bay. 

In making this report upon the development and maintenance 
of the fisheries of Buzzards Bay we have placed on record a 
vast number of facts which promise to be of present or future 
value. Two distinct types of problems are involved : first, those 
which can be settled by facts already available; and second, 
those requiring the consideration of facts not yet available but 
necessitating investigation and observations extending over a 
period of years. 

Fundamentally we are seeking to determine, as far as possi- 
ble, what is the normal annual crop of fish which can be taken 
in Buzzards Bay without injuring the future source of supply; 
secondly, the best methods of harvesting and marketing this 
annual supply. In the past an excessive number of traps and 
seines has made the fishing in the bay practically a gamble. 
More nets and traps were established than could expect a re- 
munerative season, the owners taking a chance of the fish strik- 
ing their particular trap. This leads to excessive cost through 
the undue amount of capital and labor tied up. The expense of 
catching fish is a necessary factor in the cost of those fish to the 
consiuner, and every well-devised eft'ort to bring fish upon the 
market at the lowest possible cost of capture and in the best 
possible sanitary condition is for the benefit of the consumer. 
Massachusetts is situated most fa\orabl}' upon the coast in 
reference to the spawning and feeding grounds of a large vari- 
ety of fish, and Buzzards Bay appears to be an important area 
in which fish spawn and the young in incredible numbers are 
grown. 

Among the important benefits of trap and net fishing should 
be cited the following: — 

1. It furnishes important food fish fresh, at once cheaper to 
the poor people and yet attractive to the residents who come to 
the seashore from a distance. 

2. It furnishes a considerable quantity of bait, not alone lo- 
cally but also for the important fishing centers of the State, — 
Provincetown, Gloucester and Boston. 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 9 

3. It furnishes employment for worthy men in catching and 
distributing fish. 

4. It makes considerable local business and puts money into 
circulation. 

5. If wisely carried on, it destroys considerable quantities of 
sharks and other injurious fish. 

6. As an economic proposition fish are of no value until 
placed upon the market in a cheap manner and under sanitary 
conditions. Hand lining alone is not likely to furnish an ade- 
quate market supply or to harvest the annual yield in an eco- 
nomical manner. 

7. The present condition of the bay, in which trap fishing is 
forbidden, chiefly benefits the owners of the Rhode Island traps 
off Sakonnet Point, to the prejudice of Massachusetts citizens. 

On the other hand, trap and net fishing is found to kill the 
breeding adults on or near the spawning places, and thus, if 
carried to excess, leads to inevitable depletion of the stock; 
there is considerable destruction of the young below marketable 
size. It tends to monopolization of the fishing opportunities. 
It is particularly destructive to alewife and shad fisheries, and 
thereby is exceedingly injurious from the fact that the abun- 
dance of young alewives and herring attract within the radius 
of the fishing operations of Massachusetts men quantities of 
bluefish, squeteague, pollock, bass and other valuable fish. If 
traps and nets are used in excessive numbers there results a 
waste of time and capital for those who do not chance to 
strike the fish. 

We believe that a maximum amount of food and bait should 
be furnished without detriment to the maintenance of the an- 
nual yield. Buzzards Bay is one of the most valuable assets of 
the Commonwealth, at present relatively undeveloped, and 
should be handled for the purpose of making it a source of food 
and recreation to every inhabitant of the State. Intimately 
connected with the present depletion of the bay is the depletion 
of the shad and alewife fisheries, and a complete change of 
method of handling these fisheries is urged. Suitable action 
should be taken for preventing the pollution of the bay and its 
tributaries. Every legitimate effort should be made to secure 
Federal legislation for so controlling the taking of migratory 



10 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

fish as may secure an equitable distribution of opportunities for 
wisely utilizing every phase of the fisheries assets, whether per- 
sonal, State or national. 

The following are the conclusions and recommendations of 
the Commission : — 

1. The general principle of restriction is correct for Buzzards 
Bay, as it can be shown that the bay possesses great advantages 
for the spawning of fish and rearing young fish. But to secure 
a local supply of fresh fish, a limited number of traps, not ex- 
ceeding eight, should be permitted to be maintained under 
special regulations and in such localities as best to serve the 
the largest niunber of people, without making an imnecessary 
destruction of breeding fish or of fish below the optimum mar- 
ket size. 

2. To obtain the full benefit of a closed season in Buzzards 
Bay, trap fishing off Sakonnet Point in Rhode Island should be 
restricted. The good results of restriction in Massachusetts are 
largely negatived at the present time, since they are not corre- 
lated with necessary restrictions elsewhere. To this end there 
should be Federal regulation of the taking of migratory fish. 

3. Menhaden fishing or other fishing on a large scale in the 
bay should not be allowed, but provision should be made where- 
by the lobster fishermen may obtain menhaden in reasonable 
and necessary quantities for bait. 

4. Regulation and re-establishment of the alewife fishery 
should be under State control. 

5. Future investigatioii on the Buzzards Bay fisheries would 
be of value, chiefly along these lines:- — 

(a) Studies of spawning habits and of life histories of fish 
and Crustacea in the bay, and proper measures taken to increase 
the yield of mollusks, lobsters and edible crabs. 

(b) More complete statistics of the catch in the bay by traps 
and by the line fishermen, for the i)urpose of determining the 
actual production of the bay. 

(c) Seining of portions of the bay on a large scale at intervals 
during the year, to determine the actual population of meas- 
ured areas at various times. 

(d) To confirm and to extend the observations necessary to 
develop and maintain Buzzards Bay as one of more prominent 



191G.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 11 

and increasingly valuable assets of the State for the production 
of food fish, of food and bait mollusks, and Crustacea, for the 
benefit of all the people. 

In addition to the report of our biologist, David L. Belding, 
which is submitted herewith as covering the details of this in- 
vestigation, we retain as office records, available in our office, 
a very considerable amount of original data and of records col- 
lected from various sources. 

Dr. George W. Field, Chairman, Cominissioners on Fisheries and Game, 
State Hotise, Boston, Mass. 
Sir : — I respectfuly submit the following report upon the investiga- 
tion of the fishery conditions in Buzzards Ba3^ The work was carried 
on under the provisions of chapter 104 of the Resolves of 1913, chapter 
44 of the Resolves of 1914, and chapter 19 of the Resolves of 1915. 

Respectfully submitted, 

David L. Belding, 

Biologist. 

Introduction. 

Buzzards Bay has played an important part in the develop- 
ment of the fisheries which have made INIassachusetts famous. 
In colonial days its tributaries during the spawning season were 
crowded with shad, salmon, striped bass and alewives, while 
schools of mackerel, bluefish, sea bass, butterfish, scup and 
menhaden were found within its boundaries. 

In early days the abundance of fish aft'orded a cheap and 
valuable food supply at the very doors of the inhabitants. 
Within the last two hundred years conditions ha^•e radically 
changed. The present supply is but a small portion of the 
great natural production described by historical writers, — a 
condition which has been brought about by a variety of causes 
both local and general. The flourishing condition of former 
days may never again be attained, but by the proper regulation 
of our fisheries present conditions can be improved greatly. The 
potential value of such a body of water as Buzzards Bay as an 
asset of the Commonwealth is indeed great, and the problem 
of developing the fishing resources to their former natural 
productivity is essentially important and worthy of the most 
careful consideration. 



12 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 



Preliinitiarii Report. 
A preliminary report is submitted at this time for the follow- 
ing reasons : — 

1. The investigation covered but a portion of one year in 
1913, the act not having passed until June 4, 1913, thereby 
leaving out April and May, two of the best trap-fishing months. 
In 1914 and 1915 the season included the month of May, but 
the investigation, according to the ])rovisions of the acts, was 
limited to the statistical returns of the trap fishermen. 

2. Any three or even ten years may not be typical. To ar- 
rive at definite or satisfactory conclusions, such an investiga- 
tion should be carried on over a rather long series of years. 

3. The complexity of some of the problems for which solu- 
tions are recpiired precludes the possibility of satisfactory an- 
swers in three years. Certain problems involved have been set- 
tled tentatively, others remain but partly solved. 

Julue of hiicstigatioit. 

Since 1S92 many legislative battles over the Buzzards Bay 
fisheries have disclosed two distinctly opposing parties, the one 
in favor of opening the bay to all fishing, the other in favor of 
restricting the industry to hand-line fishing. Only by accept- 
ing and using as a working basis such facts as are backed by 
authority, by statistics and by scientific research can the proper 
solution of the Buzzards Bay problem be secured, and the 
results of this investigation be made of value in subduing the 
activities of those who have a prejudiced attitude of mind for 
and against "opening the bay." It is expected that the com- 
pleted work will furnish not alone an adequate basis for legis- 
lation, adai)ted to making Buzzards Bay increasingly valuable 
to all classes of our population, but also will disclose certain 
facts concerning the fisheries which will benefit fishermen and 
consumers alike. 

As a foundation for the correct solution of these problems, a 
comparison of the past and present fisheries in Buzzards Bay 
is essential. 



1916.1 HOUSE — No. 1775. 13 



Past Fisheries. 
We have examined and correlated material upon the follow- 
ing subjects: — 

(a) Fish. — Records of the United States Bureau of Fish- 
eries and of the Massachusetts Department of Fisheries and 
Game, both published and unpublished, of the species and 
quantities of fish taken in the bay. 

(b) Traps. — United States Bureau of Fisheries, Marine Bio- 
logical Laboratory records, statistical returns of the fisheries to 
the Massachusetts Department of Fisheries and Game, and 
reports of the individual trap fishermen. 

(c) Testimony. — Interviews with, fishermen and with other 
residents of the various Buzzards Bay towns and in Rhode 
Island. 

(d) Legislative History. ■ — The arguments presented at com- 
mittee hearings and the various laws enacted. 

Present Fisheries. 

We have studied : — 

(a) Fish. — Spawning, food and habits of the species in 
Buzzards Bay in 1913, 1914 and 1915, as far as time per- 
mitted. 

(b) Traps. — In 1913 four traps were set in Buzzards Bay 
and records were obtained. Two were set by W. T. Dunn at 
South Dartmouth and two at Woods Hole, one each by the 
United States Bureau of Fisheries and the Marine Biological 
Laboratory. In addition, records were secured from Vineyard 
Sound and Rhode Island traps. In 1914 eight traps were lo- 
cated in the bay. In addition to those of the previous years, 
one trap each was set by D. P. Bosworth & Co. at Cuttyhunk, 
Otis B. Luce at Quisset Harbor, Alvin F. Waite and Benjamin 
T. Smith at South Dartmouth. In 1915 twelve traps were set 
in all, the new traps in new locations being set by O. B. Dag- 
gett at Naushon, H. Nelson Luce off Penzance, Woods Hole, 
and John R. Fish, Jr., at Horse Neck Beach, w^hile the Cutty- 
hunk trap w^as discontinued. 

(c) Boat Fishing. — Various types of boat fishing prohibited 
at present, viz., gill nets, "trawl," beam and otter trawl, were 



14 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

used in various parts of the bay to supplement the trap records, 
and to ascertain the size, quantity and species of fish taken, 
and the "dead Hners" of each method. 

Tcstiiuony. 

The testimony of the fishermen is interesting as showing the 
history of trap and other methods of fishing in Buzzards Bay, 
but it is frequently biased either in favor of or against free 
fishing, and therefore often conflicting. Without co-ordinate 
knowledge of the existing biological conditions, it is difficult to 
sift the true facts from the false. Therefore, such testimony is, 
at best, of but secondary value. 

The same applies to testimony in previous years before leg- 
islative committees. In a broad sense practically every argu- 
ment in favor of or against trap fishing in Buzzards Bay, how- 
ever sincere or true the conclusion, can be shown to have been 
based upon an erroneous interpretation or perversion of facts 
set forth in fluent but misleading language. 

The Present Laic. 

1. The provisions of the present law regulating the Buzzards 
Bay fisheries may he summarized as follows : — 

(a) Fish traps of all kinds are prohibited. 

(b) The use of all types of seines and nets, except alewife 
seines and eel fykes in tributaries, is forbidden. 

2. The law combines two legislative acts relative to (a) mov- 
able fishing apparatus (chapter 102, Acts of ISNO) and to (b) 
stationary traps (chapter 205, Acts of 1S93). 

3. In 1880 the use of seines and nets, except in Fairhaven 
W'aters, was forbidden. The act was directed against the men- 
haden fishermen. In 1S90 the exemption of Fairhaven was 
removed, and the act thereby applied to the whole of Buzzards 
Bay. 

4. Between 1880 and 1893 various towns prohibited trap 
fishing by special regulations, a movement which started at 
the head of the bay, where hand-lining was popular. Finally, 
in 1893 an act was passed applying to the entire bay. 



1916.1 HOUSE — No. 1775. 15 



Purse Seining of Menhaden. 

This type of fishing, prohibited in 1886, was never popidar 
with the trap fishermen, the hook and Hne fishermen or the 
summer residents. It was chiefly carried on by Rhode Island 
and New York firms, and furnished little employment to 
Massachusetts men. 

At the present time public opinion is distinctly against 
opening the bay to menhaden steamers. The monetary value 
of the menhaden fishery as a source of fertilizer and the im- 
provement of business by the establishment of factories are 
cited in favor of menhaden purse seining. The arguments 
against menhaden fishing are (a) " the destruction of a food at- 
tracting other fish;" (b) "the driving away of food fish;" 
(c) "the capture of other fish with the menhaden;" (d) "the 
destruction of a fish which could be taken in traps and gill 
nets by the Massachusetts fishermen for bait;" (c) not a 
Massachusetts industry;" (/) "the steamers are a nuisance." 

Under- existing conditions the opening of Buzzards Bay in 
any manner or degree to the menhaden steamers is undesirable. 
Provision, however, should be made to permit the lobstermen 
to obtain menhaden for bait by the use of gill nets under suit- 
able regulations. Such a procedure would be of great benefit 
to the fishermen if a practical plan can be devised for avoiding 
conflict with the other fisheries. 

Otter Trawling. 
The results of many sets made by us indicate that the 
greater part of Buzzards Bay is not adapted to this method 
of fishing, owing to boulders on the bottom. 

Gill Net. 
Excellent catches of menhaden were made during the summer. 
A few other fish, principally scup and butterfish, were taken. 
This method would be of value to the lobster fishermen for 
securing bait, if it could be so safeguarded that only menhaden 
could be taken. 



IG 



FISH AND FISHERIES. 



[Feb. 



Line Trawls. 
Quantities of tautog, with a very few scup, were taken on 
trawls. Dogfish, usually Acanthias americanus, Storer, com- 
monly called "smooth dog," were caught. This species was 
especially destructive to the food fish on the trawl. 

Ha nd-line Fis liiiig . 
It is the general opinion that hand-line fishing is on the 
decline. The catche? are less than twenty-five years ago, and 
it is said to be no longer commercially profitable. 



Rhode Island Traps. 

1. The trap fishery of Rhode Island is of great value. Large 
catches are made each spring. 

2. The position of the traps is such that they offset to a 
great extent the benefit derived from reserving Buzzards Bay 
as a breeding place for migratory fish. 

3. The floating traps off Sakonnet and Newport extend at 
the present time nearly two-thirds the way across the entrance 
of Buzzards Bay, in the form of a triangle. These traps are 
so placed that the leader of one trap runs practically from the 
bowl of the next trap, making an unbroken line approximately 
ten miles in extent on each side of the triangle. 

4. The number of traps, especially the offshore floating 
traps, has increased in the last fifteen years. 



Year. 



Sukonnet 
Point. 



Offshore. 



Total 
Number. 



1898, . 
1909, . 
1911, . 



119 
271 
277 



The 1909 report of the Rhode Island Commission on Inland 
Fisheries states: "Especially noticeable is the continued in- 
crease in number in the Sakonnet River and offshore divisions, 
where the cordon of traps is being extended and covers new 
territory each year. The fishermen are continuing to push 
their traps a surprisingly great distance offshore." 



Xkt^^>i^s^ 




1916.1 



HOUSE — No. 1775. 



17 



The percentage of offshore to total traps has increased from 
21.5 m 1900 to 31 in 1910. 

5. The average catch per trap has diminished with the 
increase in the number of traps. The only available figures 
are from Newport, and those probably give a fair comparison, 
although the argument may be advanced that the shipment of 
fish from other points has increased. 





Total 

Number of 

Traps. 


Offshore 
Traps. 


B.\RRELs OF Fish shipped fro.m 
Newport. 


Years. 


Total. 


Average 

Catch per 

Trap. 


Average 
Cateli per 

Trap, 
May and 

June. 


1896-1900, .... 

1901-1905 

1906-1910, .... 


125 
193 
271 


26.0 
37.6 
73.8 


.32,832.2 
54,220.2 
53,705.6 


262.7 
280.9 
198.2 


151.7 
170.0 
107.7 



6. Over one-half the catch of fish are taken during the 
northern migration in May and June. From the census of 
1888 and 1898 the per cent, of fish by weight is as follows: — 





Per Cent. 


Scup, 


47.0 


Alewife, 


8.9 


Flatfish, 


7.7 


Sea bass, 


4.8 


Butterfish, 


2.5 



7. The floating traps are huge affairs, 270 feet long, 120 
feet wide, 80 feet deep, with a leader 1,800 feet in length, and 
are valued between $800 and $1,000. In recent years there 
have been unsuccessful attempts made to secure legislation to 
require a certain distance between traps, thus enabling fish to 
pass through, instead of forming a practically complete barrier, 
as at present. 

8. The fish which escape these traps pass into Buzzards Bay 
through the openings from Vineyard Sound, or enter by the 
narrow strip of water outside the Rhode Island traps. It is 
also possible for some fish to escape capture directly by the 
Rhode Island traps, but considering the amount of scup taken 
on their eastern migration, these traps, through their number 
and location, are extremely detrimental to the Buzzards Bay 



18 



FISH AND FISHERIES. 



[Feb. 



fisheries, and to the vakie of Buzzards Bay as a breeding place 
for useful fish. 

9. A similar increase in the number of traps oft' Cape Hat- 
teras and the Jersey shore has been reported. These traps 
are taking the migratory fish in the same manner as the 
nearby Rhode Island traps. 

10. Federal control of the migratory fish and fisheries is the 
most practical means of correcting the exi.sting conditions rela- 
tive to the imwise and unnecessarily destructive exploitation 
of migratory fish. 

Food Fish. 

The fish which were commercially important in Buzzards 
Bav in 1913 to 1915 were: — 



Buttcrfisih. . 

8('up. 

Mackerel. 

Flounders. 

Sciiioteague. 



Tautog. 
Sea bass. 
Menhaden. 
Alewife. 
Herring. 



In addition, the following fish have l)een valuable in previous 
years, but are no longer commercially important in the bay: — 



Blucfish. 
Bonito. 



Striped l)ass. 
Shad. 



The first appearance of certain species oft' Newport for the 
past six years, according to tlie reports of Rhode Island Com- 
mission of Inland Fisheries, is as follov.'s: — 



Fish. 


Dates. 


Approximate 
Date. 


Butterfi.sh 

Mackerel, 

Sea ba.ss, 

Scup 

Squeteague, 


April 16-May 10 

April 17-May 6 

May J -May 8 

April 19-May 2 

May 4-June 14 


May 1. 
May 1. 
May 4. 
April 25. 
May 20. 



Practically all these fish are migratory. The flounder and 
the tautog are migratory only to a limited degree. The spring 
run of these fish takes place usually during jMay and Jime. 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 19 

Predaceous Fish. 
The common predaceous fish found in Buzzards Bay are as 
follows : — 

Smooth dogfish. Skates f various species). 

Spiny dogfish. Rays (various species). 

Goosefish. . Sharks (various species). 

All of these species are used as food in Europe and Asia, but 
are not extensively utilized in the United States. 

Other abundant fish not used for food at the present time 
are certain of the — 

Sea robins. Swellfish. 

Sculpins. 

Certain species should be used as food. Sharks are often 
sold as and are a worthy substitute for swordfish. Dogfish are 
edible, as are portions of skates, sculpins 'and sea robins. In 
the future these fish will be sold for food, as is the custom at 
the present time abroad. Other uses, such as for fertilizer, oil, 
etc., can be made of many at present apparently useless species. 

Dogfish, sharks, skates, rays and goosefish prey upon the 
food fish. 

It is difficult to actually determine whether the number of 
predaceous fish has increased during the last twenty years. 
Testimony of fishermen upon this point is well-nigh valueless. 
For the last thirteen years records of the trap of the United 
States Bureau of Fisheries indicate that there has been an in- 
crease in the number of dogfish at Woods Hole. In the five 
years from 1898 to 1902 the average catch in the Buzzards Bay 
fish trap of the United States Bureau of Fisheries was .342.4 
dogfish; from 1903 to 1908 the average catch was 806.6; and 
from 1909 to 1913, 1,637.8. 

Trap Fishing. 
The commercial aspects of trap fishing at the present time 
are shown in this table : — 



20 



FISH AND FISHERIES. 



[Feb. 



Year. 



Number 
of Traps. 



Total 

Number 

of Days 

set. 



Value 

of Gross 
Catch. 



Revenue 

to State. 



Average 

Gross 
Catch per 

Day 
per Trap. 



1913, 
1914, 
1915, 



253 

790 

1,344 



$570 60 
5,218 50 
5,011 77 



S365 29 
350 82 



.$190 20 
579 83 
455 61 



The poor season in 1913 was due to (a) an "off year;" (b) 
late start, the months of April, May, and with the South Dart- 
mouth traps June, being lost; (c) the Marine Biological Labora- 
tory trap was not operated primarily for commercial purposes. 

Increased returns in 1914 were due chiefly to (a) the additional 
catch in the Cuttyhunk trap, which was not operated in 1913 
and 1915; (b) a large run of mackerel on east side of the bay, 
shown chiefly in catch of the Quisset Harbor trap. In 1915 the 
catch in this trap was about one-half the 1914 yield. 

The 1915 season was less successful than the previous year: 
(a) the returns for the traps on the west side of the bay were 
approximately the same for 1914 and 1915; (b) the traps on 
the east side gave only about one-half the 1914 production. 



Comparison of 1914 and 1915. 



Owner of Trap. 


Number. 


Location. 


1914. 


1915. 


B. T. Smith, .... 


_i 


Mauchaum, South Dartmouth, 


S644 57 


$728 09 


Alvin Waite, .... 


-• 


Salters Point, Dartmouth, 


478 43 


522 00 


Wm. T. Dunn, 





Ricketson Point, Dartmouth, 


343 14 


161 00 


Otis B. Luce 


1 


Quisset Harbor, 


1,760 06 


824 48 


Marine Biological Laboratory, 


1 


Uncatena, .... 


922 44 


405 29 



It has been demonstrated tliat trap fishing can be conducted 
profitably in Buzzards Bay but that the returns are less than 
in the years previous to 1893. If permitted it should yield im- 
mediate returns to one class of fishermen and furnish a limited 
number of men with employment. 

If trap fishing is to be allowed, it should be regulated by the 
Commonwealth, with uniform rules as to size of mesh, dimen- 



1 One in 1914, two in 1915. 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 21 

sions of trap, etc. A suitable rental should be paid each year 
for the privilege. 

Trap fishing destroys quantities of small fish, since "strain- 
ers" are seldom used. Trap fishermen estimate that not over 
5 per cent, of the entire catch is destroyed. Estimates from a 
carefully tended trap, where precautions were taken to separate 
the small fish, indicate that the numerical waste is considerably 
higher, — probably between 20 and 25 per cent, of the total 
catch. Care on the part of the fishermen, the use of "strain- 
ers," and the separation of the schools of small fish would do 
much to lessen the danger from this source. 

Buzzards Bay fisheries have generally declined. Trap fishing 
in Buzzards Bay has not been the only cause, as the decline 
has contintied during its prohibition of trap fishing, but un- 
doubtedly the presence of fish traps would have accelerated the 
decline. The main causes lie outside of Massachusetts, prin- 
cipally in the waters of Rhode Island and to the south. 

Fish Food. 

Buzzards Bay contains large quantities of plankton, which 
constitutes the fundamental food supply for the small fish. 
The presence of small fish, such as minnows, sand eels, silver- 
sides, herring, alewives and menhaden, together with large 
quantities of squid, attract the larger fish. The warm water, 
the numerous inlets and coves, and the fresh-water streams 
make possible this production of abundant food for fish. 

The alewife has long been a source of profit as a food fish 
and as bait for the commercial fisherman, but it has a greater 
value as a natural source of food, which attracts the larger fish 
to our shores. In this way the decline of the alewife fishery 
has affected the supply of larger fish, and the decrease in ale- 
wives has been a prominent factor in the disappearance of the 
bluefish, striped bass, squeteague and other predaceous mi- 
gratory fish which formerly resorted to these feeding grounds. 
Owing to its importance a special survey of the alewife fishery 
was made. The results of this investigation show that — - 

1. This fishery has declined approximately 75 per cent. 

2. The causes of the decline have been overfishing, pollution 



22 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

and the careless and unnecessary obstruction of the streams by 
milldams and cranberry bogs. 

3. Only a few of the streams have a fishery of any value at 
the present time. 

4. Many fisheries can be re-established by the proper stock- 
ing and regulation of the streams. 

5. The present laws governing the alewife should be remod- 
eled and the fisheries placed under State control. 

Pollution. 
Buzzards Bay receives manufacturing and sewage waste in 
two ways : — 

1. Immediate sources, i.e., New Bedford sewers. 

2. Remote sources, i.e., polluting material discharged into 
creeks entering the bay. 

At New Bedford the sewage passes into the bay from forty- 
five outlets and thirty mills discharge chemical waste products, 
while Fairhaven has six outlets and several manufacturing 
plants, liecently ]\lattapoisett has installed a sewer emptying 
into the bay. 

For sanitary reasons the pollution is more serious for the 
shellfish industries than from tlie standpoint of fish conserva- 
tion. In the immediate vicinity of excessive pollution fish 
cannot live, and the constant emptying into the bay of such 
material will tend to drive fish elsewhere. Pollution may have 
been a contributing factor in the decline of the fisheries, but 
it is one of the minor causes, owing to its local nature. 

Buzzards Bay c/.v a Spawning (Jround. 
1. Qualifications. — It was not possible to solve this prob- 
lem by an investigation limited to part of a year. Certain 
facts have been determined, others obtained from various 
"writings and from the testimony of fishermen. Buzzards Bay 
is a part of a large spawning ground embracing Vineyard 
Sound, the south side of Cape Cod and Long Island Sound. 
Whether it is of greater value than other waters as a spawning 
ground has not been determined, although it has the natural 
conditions which attract the fish and in this way undoubtedly 
possesses special advantages. 



lOin.l HOUSE — No. 1775. 23 

The yoiino- of the glut herrmg, sciip, sea bass and numerous 
small bait fish, menhaden, shad, alewife, tautog, cunner, butter- 
fish, swellfish and flounder have been taken at different stages 
of development in the waters of the bay. The young of other 
fish have not been identified so that a complete series from the 
egg could be obtained from Buzzards Bay. All observed facts 
bear out the statement of Mnal Edwards, collector for the 
United States Bureau of Fisheries for over forty years, who 
stated in 1892 that Buzzards Bay is a breeding ground and 
good nursery for scup, sea bass, tautog and w^arm-water fish. 

2. Spaivning of Certain Species. — The following is of inter- 
est : — 

Bluefish. — A few have well-developed spawn on arrival in tJie latter 
part of Maj^, but there is no proof that they spawn in the bay. 

Bonito. — June; present from June to October 1. 

Bidterfish. ^ — ■ June. 

Mackerel. — ■ Spawns during the middle and latter part of June, off 
shore. 

Menhaden. — Spawns in June, but probably not in Buzzards Bay. 

Sea bass. ^ — • Middle of May to first of July. 

Squeteague. — Spawns about June 1. 

Scup. ^ — ■ Earl_y in June. 

Striped Bass. — Does not spawn in Buzzards Bay, l)ut formerly did in 
the tributaries. 

Shad.^ — Arrives about May 1, remaining only a week. Contains 
well-advanced spawn on arrival. Spawns in the tributaries. 

Alewife. ^ — March and April. Spawns in the tributaries. 

Tautog. ^ — June and July. 

Further study of the spawning habits of these fish is neces- 
sary before more than a broad, general statement of the value 
of Buzzards Bay as a spawning ground can be definitely made. 

Arguments. 

Various arguments for and against trap fishing have been 
stated at committee hearings in past years. The majority 
are based on faulty premises. Since these same points may 
again be brought forward at subsequent hearings, it is well 
to consider the actual value of these stock arguments. 

Arguments against Trap Fishing. — 1. Buzzards Bay is an 

' Species that are definitely known to spawn in Buzzards Bay. 



24 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

especially favorable spawning ground and a nursery for numer- 
ous migratory fish. 

Per contra: Definite proof that Buzzards Bay is a special 
spawning ground different from or superior to the neighboring 
waters has never l)een obtained, although the fact that it has 
special advantages as a nursery for young fish is undoubtedly 
true. 

2. Trap fishing is the cause of the decline in the fishery. 
Per contra: There have been no traps in the bay for years, 

yet the decline has continued. The excessive trap fishery in 
Rhode Island has doubtless been a prominent cause of this 
decline, in co-operation with the decline of the alewife and shad 
fisheries in the tributary streams. Nevertheless, the decline 
cannot be attributed entirely to trap fishing in Buzzards Bay, 
for excessive catching of breeding fish in the Middle Atlantic 
States has also been a contributing factor. 

3. The sport of hand-line fishing l)rings summer people to 
Buzzards Bay. 

Per contra: This was a sound and consistent argument in 
1892, but to-day conditions ha\"e so changed that the summer 
people would come to the shores of Buzzards Bay even if 
fishing were {loor, though good line fishing is doubtless an 
additionally important and valuable attraction. 

4. Trap fishing is injurious, as the fish "hug the shore" in 
their migration. 

Per contra: It has been shown that the fish follow the 
shore only in a general sense, and therefore the traps can catch 
only a percentage of the total number. 

5. Hand-line fishing would benefit the poor man by making 
it possible for men with small capital to secure a livelihood. 

Per contra: Under present conditions the poor man would be 
little benefited, but if fishing were improved, hand-lining 
Avould furnish a valuable food supply for the poor man. 

Arguments in Favor of Trap Fishing. — 1. Trap fishing 
destroys the predaceous fish. 

Per contra: These fish were formerly often merely liberated, 
not killed, by the trap fishermen in the rush of haiding the 
trap. At present many of these fish could be utilized for food 
or fertilizer. 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 25 

2. Trap fishing would bring extra business to the Buzzards 
Bay towns. 

Per contra: The business would be limited to a few men. 

3. The price of fish would be cheaper. 

Per contra: This usually would not hold true, as the price 
depends upon the transportation facilities and the market 
demands at centers of distribution. To-day more fish are 
caught than are economically utilized. 

4. Trap fishing would furnish bait for the fishermen. This 
is a reasonable argument, as at the present time there is often 
scarcity of bait for the lobster fishermen and fishing boats. 

5. Buzzards Bay is not a spawning ground for the fish taken 
in the traps. 

Per contra: While this point has not- been completely 
determined, there is evidence to prove that many fish spawn 
in Buzzards Bay. 

Ads authorizing the Investigation. 
The three acts under which this work was carried out are as 
follows : — 

Acts of 1913, Chapter 104. 

Resolve to provide for an Investigation of the Fisheries of Buz- 
zard's Bay. 

Resolved, That the board of commissioners on fisheries and game is 
hereby directed to make an investigation and report upon the fish and 
fisheries of Buzzard's bay, with particular reference to the quantities and 
species of edible and non-edible fish to be found therein, the effect of the 
present laws and restrictions in respect to the taking of fish therein, and 
the methods of taking fish. 

For the purpose the said commissioners may employ additional assist- 
ance and experts, and may establish, operate and maintain fish traps or 
pounds, and may authorize others, under their direction, and in such 
manner and on such terms as they may deem expedient, to establish, 
operate and maintain fish traps and pounds, and may purchase, hire, 
lease, set, operate and maintain movable or stationary apparatus and 
boats for taking fish; and may take such other action as may be deemed 
proper for carrying out the purposes of this resolve. The said commis- 
sioners ma)'' sell or authorize the sale of fish taken for the purposes of this 
investigation, and may sell any apparatus or boats acquired hereunder, 
and the proceeds shall be paid into the treasury of the commonwealth. 

The said commissioners, if they so desire, may hold one or more public 
hearings, at such times and places as they may appoint, for the purpose 



26 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

of hearing persons interested and of obtaining statistics and other informa 
tion. The said commissioners sliall report to the general court on or 
before the second Wednesday of January, nineteen hundred and fourteen, 
the result of their investigations, together with such recommendations as 
in their opinion are calculated to increase and perpetuate the annual yield 
of useful fish from I>uzzard's bay and its tributaries; and in said report 
the commissioners shall state whether in their opinion the existing laws 
governing the fislieries in Buzzard's bay should continue to remain in 
force, be repealed, or modified, and if modified, to what extent, and they 
shall also submit with their report such drafts of proposed legislations as 
may be necessary to carry said recommendations into effect. 

The commissioners may expend from the treasury of the common- 
wealth a sum not exceeding twenty-five hundred dollars in carrying out the 
purposes of this resolve. [Approred June 4, 1013. 

Acts of 1914, Chapter 44. 

Resolve to trovide for the Continuation of an Investigation of 
THE Fisheries of Buzzard's Bay. 

Resolved, That the board of commissioners on fisheries and game is 
hereby tlirected to continue its investigation of the fish antl fisheries of 
Buzzard's bay, as provided Ijy chapter one hundred and four of the re- 
solves of the year nineteen hundred and thirteen, with particular reference 
to the quantities and spawning of edible and non-ediljle fish frecjuenting 
the bay. 

For the said purjjoses the commissioners may establish, operate and 
maintain fish traps or pounds, and may authorize others, under their di- 
rection, to establish, operate and maintain fish traps and pounds; and 
may set, operate and maintain movable or staticmary apparatus and 
boats for taking fish, and may take such other action as may be deemed 
by them proper for carrying out tlic purjxjses of this resolve. The pro- 
ceeds of the sale of any fish taken under this resolve shall be used in such 
manner as, in the discretion of said commissioners, will facilitate their 
investigation. 

The commissioners shnll report to the general court on or jjcfore the 
second Wednesday of .lanuary, in the year nineteen hundred and fifteen, 
the result of the investigation, with such recommendations as in their 
opinion may tend to perpetuate and increase the annual yield of useful 
fish in Buzzard's bay and its tributaries. [Approve 1 April lo, IOI4. 

Acts of 1915, Chaptek 19. 

Resolve providing for the Continuation of an Investigation op 

THE Fisheries of Buzzard's Bay. 

Resolved, That the board of commissioners on fisheries and game is 

hereby directed to continue its investigation of the fish and fisheries of 

Buzzard's bay, as provided by chapter one hundred and four of the re- 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 27 

solves of the year nmetcen hundred and thirteen, with particular reference 
to the quantities and spawning of edible and non-edible fish frequenting 
the bay. 

For the said purposes the commissioners may estabhsh, operate and 
maintain fish traps or pounds, and may authorize others, under their dis- 
cretion, to estabhsh, operate and maintain fish traps and pounds; and 
may set, operate and maintain movable or stationary apparatus and 
boats for taking fish, and may take such other action as may be deemed 
by them proper for carrying out the purposes of this resolve. The pro- 
ceeds of the sale of any fi^h taken under this resolve shall be used in such 
manner as, in the discretion of said commissioners, will facilitate their 
investigation. 

The commissioners shall report to the general court on or before the 
second Wednesday of January, in the year nineteen hundred and sixteen, 
the result of the investigation, with such recommendations as in their 
opinion maj^ tend to perpetuate and increase the annual yield of useful 
fish in Buzzard's bay and its tributaries. [Approved March 11, 1915. 

The first act, which was approved June 4, 1913, provided 
for an investigation of the fisheries of Buzzards Bay particu- 
larly in respect to the quantity of fish, the present methods of 
fishing and the effect of the present laws upon the fisheries. 
The provisions are, briefly:- — 

1. An investigation of the fisheries in Buzzards Bay. 

2. A particular study of the quantities of edible and non-ed- 
ible fish inhabiting the bay at the present time. 

3. Present methods of catching fish. 

4. The effect of fishing m.ethods now prohibited in Buzzards 
Bay when applied to present conditions. 

5. The employment of suitable assistants and experts. 

6. The use of boats and fishing gear of all kinds. 

7. The authorization of responsible person to conduct ex- 
perimental fishing. 

8. Provisions for the sale of fish and apparatus. 

9. The holding of public hearings, if desired, by the commis- 
sioners, and the collection of testimony and evidence. 

10. The submitting of a report embodying the residts of the 
investigation with such recommendations as seem calculated to 
increase and perpetuate the annual yield of useful fish. 

The provisions of the second and third resolves continued the 
investigation upon the fish and fisheries of Buzzards Bay by 
stipulating that the commissioners might establish, operate and 



28 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

maintain fish traps or authorize others to do so under their 
direction, and that the proceeds from the sale of fish were to be 
used in such manner as to faciUtate tlie investigation. Tliese 
resolves did not essentially differ from the first except that the 
lack of an appropriation for carrying on the investigation 
proved a serious and permanent drawback to the value of the 
work. For this reason it is impossible to furnish from the 
records for 1914 and 1915 any further facts than the actual 
cost of operating the fish traps and the yield in fish according 
to the figures returned to this office by the individual fishermen, 
who had set traps imder contract with the Commissioners on 
Fisheries and Game. Statistics showing the number of the dif- 
ferent fish in Buzzards Bay for a long term of years would be 
of great value, as interpreting the possibilities of Buzzards Bay 
as a fishing ground and as an index of the general effect upon 
the Massachusetts fisheries of the large number of traps ofT 
Sakonnet Point in Rhode Island and further south. However, 
in considering the value of such statistics, accuracy is the most 
essential, and in the years to come the veracity of statistics 
such as were obtained during lOl-l and 1915 will be open to 
criticism that they were from partisan sources. If future in- 
vestigation is to be carried on for a series of years suitable 
provision should be made to enable this department to con- 
duct an investigation of trap fishing which would be over and 
above criticism. 

It is essential that records should be taken in all parts of the 
bay at the sailie time. In 1914 the withdrawal of the trap at 
Cuttyhunk and the trap on the eastern side of Buzzards Bay at 
an early date made the comparison for the remaining months of 
the summer impossil>le, and i)roved a considerable detriment in 
formulating the statistics for that year. Such circumstances 
arise from the fact that certain of the men who carry on the 
trap fishing under the provisions of the above act are imbued 
not alone with the desire to accumulate accurate statistics but 
chiefly with the idea of obtaining the privilege for commercial 
purposes. This is evident from the fact that the traps were 
kept down only during the good fishing months and not during 
the latter months of the summer. In such cases partial statis- 
tics are almost as worthless as none at all, and it is evident 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 29 

that if reliable statistics are to be obtained a different method 
of investigation must be pursued. 

The causes which led to the passing of the resolve of 1913 
and the subsequent one of 1914 date their origin back to 1886, 
when Buzzards Bay was first closed to seining, and to 1893, 
when trap fishing was prohibited throughout the entire bay. 
At that time and ever since there have been two parties, — the 
one in favor of unrestricted fishing and chiefly represented by 
men interested in trap fishing and their numerous sympa- 
thizers, the other desirous of keeping Buzzards Bay free from 
commercial fishing. The latter party was represented by some 
residents and a few commercial hand-line fishermen, who con- 
sidered trap fishing as encroaching upon their livelihood, by the 
sportsmen and recreational fishermen and by the Old Colony 
Club. Ever since 1892 bills have come annually before the 
legislative committee on fisheries and game petitioning for the 
opening .of Buzzards Bay to trap fishing. Each time that the 
advocates of an open bay have entered the legislative arena 
with a bill of this sort there have resulted long drawn-out 
legislative battles, in which much money, time and energy have 
been wasted, and no change has ever been made. Such legis- 
lative strife has resulted not only in loss of time and money to 
those interested, but has proved an expense to the Common- 
wealth by burdening the Legislature and legislative committees 
with an endless and useless discussion upon the fisheries of 
Buzzards Bay. It is therefore highly desirable that this ques- 
tion be decided, as far as may be, once for all. 

The present acts are legitimate offsprings of former bills 
which have appeared in previous years. Openly they appear as 
an appeal for a much-needed investigation of fishery conditions 
in Buzzards Bay. However, it is merely an approach to an old 
subject from a new angle, and once more this report will resur- 
rect the old strife. In previous years this matter has often 
been thrashed out, and so much antagonism has existed be- 
tween the two parties that a report of this kind, no matter how 
exact or impartial, will not be accepted as creditable evidence 
by one or the other faction, and the same stubborn antagonism 
as of old will continue. If such a state of affairs exists, as will 
in all probability occur, the time, labor and results of this in- 



30 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

vestigatioD from u practical standpoint will be of little avail. 
It is hoped, therefore, that the facts presented in this report 
will be considei-ed solely from the standpoint of the statistics 
themselves, and that the reader will not be biased by the va- 
rious arguments put forth by the advocates of either side, 
since practically every argument which has ever been advanced 
upon the question of the fisheries of Buzzards Bay can be or 
has been shown to be based upcMi fictitious data or fallacious 
reasoning. Only by taking the accredited facts which are here 
presented and placing the correct interpretation thereupon can 
the Legislature decide what may best be done with the fisheries 
of Buzzards Bay. 

The Problem. 

The problems presented by this investigation are of two 
kinds: (1) those capable of being solved in a short period of 
time; (2) those which require several years to be accurately 
determined. Unfortunately, most of the individual problems 
connected with this investigation fall under the second classifi- 
cation, and unless systematic work is conducted for a series of 
years, can never be adequately answered. The main question, 
as to whether Buzzards Bay should be open to all types of 
fishing or restricted to certain branches, resolves itself into 
several subsidiary problems which must first be answered in 
order to interpret properly their bearing upon the main issue. 
The folloAving problems are grouped according as to whether 
they have been completely or incompletely determined by this 
investigation: — 

Determined. — 1. The approximate quantity of the different 
species of fish found in Buzzards Bay during the summers of 
1913, 1914 and 1915. 

2. Commercial })ossibilities in the prohibited types of fishing. 

)). To what extent, if any, such prohibited methods are 
injurious. 

4. The influence of food and liait upon the abundance of 
fish, particularly with regard to the alewife fishery. 

o. The inffuence of pollution upon the fisheries. 

6. The effect of the Rhode Island fish traps upon the fisheries 
of Buzzards Bay. 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 31 

7. iV comparison of fishing conditions and trap fishing of 
twenty-five years ago with the present situation. 

Incompletely determined. — 1. The extent to which Buzzards 
Bay is a spawning ground. 

2. Whether the value of Buzzards Bay in terms of the 
commercial fisheries eciuals its vahie as a fish-producing area. 

3. The possible eft'ect of opening the bay to all types of fish- 
ing at the present time. 

4. A specific method of increasing the supply of food fish i^i 
Buzzards Bay. 

Presentation. 

It is the aim of this report to present in their entirety the 
miscellaneous facts which have been disclosed during the past 
three summers rather than to make any abstract deductions. 
A few conclusive and positive facts regarding the present 
condition of the fisheries in Buzzards Bay are of greater value 
as a basis for proper legislation than all theories, partisan or 
nonpartisan, deduced from complete or incomplete evidence. 
Records for but two or three years are neither a true nor an 
accurate test of the fisheries in Buzzards Bay, since fishing 
conditions are continually fluctuating. Only by a series of 
observations covering a period of ten to twenty years may satis- 
factory conclusions on many important problems be reached. 
Many years of investigation are required before satisfactory 
solutions may be advanced for all the problems associated with 
it. The results of the past three summers are presented with 
the hope that they will be suflScient, from a practical stand- 
point, to furnish a reliable working basis for the proper man- 
agement of the situation in Buzzards Bay. 

An established principle of the Commissioners on Fisheries and 
Game is the development of fishing resources of the Common- 
wealth by increasing the available fish supply, and mean- 
while aftording suitable facilities for the development of 
legitimate fishing industries along lines consistent with the 
conservation of the fisheries. The legislative policy of the past 
has been an attempt to preserve the fisheries by restricting 
the catch in most instances, e.g., with the mollusk fisheries, — 
an unsound and erroneous economical principle. 

The true solution of our fishing problem is to increase the 



32 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

supply by cultural methods and restrict the catch only when 
such measures may be used in combination with cultural 
methods, or when it becomes advisable to reserve certain areas 
exclusiv^ely for reproductive reservations. The immediate 
problem is to decide whether the value of Buzzards Bay for the 
continuous annual production of fish is a greater benefit to the 
fisheries of JNIassachusetts than would be the immediate cash 
value of its fisheries, which would result in intermittent har- 
vests, the profits from which would naturally be decreased by 
the added cost of installing and maintaining an unnecessarily 
large number of traps. 

Courtesies. 

Through the courtesy of the National Commissioner on Fish 
and Fisheries, Dr. Hugh IM. Smith, the Bureau of Fisheries has 
provided this department with laboratory facilities, wharfage 
and a certain amount of fishing gear during the investigation, 
as well as furnishing needed assistants and placing at our dis- 
posal many important records. Special mention should be 
made of aid and advice furnished by Collector Yina^ Edwards, 
Directors E. B. V. Pope and H. ]\Iitchell, Superintendents 
Lock and Thomas, and Capt. R. V. Veeder; and acknowledg- 
ment should also be made to G. M. Gray, curator, and Dr. 
Gilman A. Drew of the Marine Biological Laboratory. 

In 1913, Roy S. Corwin of Williamstown, W. G. Vinal of 
Wellfleet, George F. Hopkins of Brewster and Clifton Eldredge 
of Ilarwichport were engaged in the summer investigation, and 
Deputy Commissioner Charles L. Savery of Marion made ob- 
servations upon hand trawl fishing during September at the 
headwaters of the bay. Messrs Vinal and Eldredge took 
charge of the boat fishing at Woods Hole, while Mr Hopkins 
covered the traps and territory on the west side of the bay, 
and Mr. Corwin covered the east side in addition to con- 
ducting laboratory work at Woods Hole. In the aiitmnn he 
collected data upon the alewife fisheries, and upon the pollution 
of the streams entering Buzzards Bay. In 191-1 and 1915 
Leslie J. Gilbride of Roslindale acted as assistant. The work 
of all the assistants, and in particular that of Mr. R. S. Corwin, 
is worthy of commendation. 



1916.1 HOUSE — No. 1775. 33 



Methods of Investigation. 

To facilitate matters the investigation was dixided into two 
distinct parts, each with its own particular bearing upon the 
problem: (1) an historical study of past conditions in Buzzards 
Bay from all available records; (2) a survey of the present 
status of the fisheries for comparison with past conditions and 
with other localities. 

Past Conditions. — Records of previous years A\ere obtained 
from a variety of sources. Some proved of great value, others 
were entirely worthless. Every accessible subject was in- 
vestigated and large quantities of material were collected. 
The chief sources of information were as follows: — 

The records of the United States Bureau of Fisheries, both 
published and unpublished, furnished through the courtesy of 
Commissioner Hugh M. Smith, gave much valuable informa- 
tion concerning the habits and species of fish inhabiting the 
bay. 

Our own reports gave detailed records of the catch in Buz- 
zards Bay and Vineyard Sound since 1870, and the attested 
returns of fishermen during the past ten years were available. 
Unfortunately, many fishermen did not submit their returns, 
and the records therefore do not designate the total valuation 
t>f the fisheries. However, from a practical standpoint and for 
comparative purposes, the records of trap and net fishing are 
entirely satisfactory as illustrating the commercial value. 

The records of the fish trap of tlie United States Bureau of 
Fisheries, which has been maintained in Buzzards Bay during 
the last ten years, proved valuable. 

Records of the old fish traps in the bay were obtained from 
the filed returns and old accounts of the trap fishermen. In 
most instances the size, shape and location of the trap and 
record of the catch w^re obtained. 

The testimony of many fishermen and shore residents, both 
])revious trap owners and persons opposed to trap fishing, was 
taken by special interviews. Town reports, which furnished 
little information except records of permits to put out fish 
traps, vrere consulted, and from the miscellaneous material thus 
collected the history of trap and net fishing in Buzzards Bay 



34 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

was obtained. The suggestions and opinions of the various 
men were classified. 

Present Conditions. — An effort was made to obtain some 
idea as to the quantity and species of fish in the bay during 
the various fishing months, chiefly through fish traps and boat 
fishing. 

1. Traps. — Under the provisions of the act authorizing the 
investigation the commissioners were given the power to permit 
certain traps to be ])hiced in the waters of the bay, subject to 
their oversight. In 1913 four traps were phiced in Buzzards 
Bay pro])er, and were located as follows: — 

The Marine Biological Laboratory trap at Woods Hole 
on the north shore of Xanshon Island, near the site formerly 
occupied by the trap of Mr. Prince Stewart, thus affording a 
valuable comparison. 

The trap of the United States Bureau of Fisheries, located 
south of Quisset Harbor, where the same trap has been located 
for the past fifteen years. 

A trap on the west side of Chirks Cove, South Dartmouth, 
operated l)y W. T. Dunn of South Dartmouth. 

A trap at Ricketson's Point, South Dartmouth, operated by 
W. T. Dunn of South Dartmouth. 

In addition, records were secured from traps located just out- 
side the boundaries of the bay, i.e., (1) a trap at Cuttyhunk, 
owned by Bosworth and Veeder; (2) a trap in Quick's Hole,, 
owned by H. Nelson Luce; (3) the Vineyard Sound trap of 
the Marine Biological Lalioratories, situated on the south side 
of Nauslion Island, and (4) other traps in Vineyard Sound. 

In addition to the traps placed in the bay in 1913 several 
new traps were located in the following ])laces in 1914:- — 

On the north side of the island of Cuttyhunk, by David P. 
Bosworth & Company. 

At the entrance of Quisset Harbor, by Otis B. Luce of Vine- 
yard Haven. 

Oft' Salters Point, South Dartmouth, by x\lvin Waite. 

Oft' Machaum in South Dartmouth, by Benjamin T. Smith. 

In 1915 three other traps were set, while the Bosworth trap 
was discontinued. 

Near Kettle Cove on the island of Naushon, by Oved S. 
Daggett. 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 35 

Off Penzance, Woods Hole, by H. Nelson Luce. 

At Horse Neck Beach, Westport, by John R. Fish, Jr. 

For these traps records Vv^ere made of the species of fish taken, 
edible and non-edible, their number, weight and value; the 
number of young fish taken and destroyed: the food of the 
different species; and the cost of maintaining and tending the 
traps. Unfortunately, no traps were located at the head of 
the bay. 

2. Boat Fishing. — Traps accounted only for the fish that 
frequent the shores. In order to obtain an accurate and definite 
idea of the fish inhabiting the whole bay, it was necessary to 
supplement the trap records with boat fishing, since statistics 
gathered from line fishermen at the head of the bay proved of 
little, value. 

The oyster boat of Capt. James Monahan of Wareham was 
hired for the summer of 1913, and with it daily records were 
taken in various parts of the bay under the supervision of 
W. G. Vinal, chiefly by using prohibited types of fishing gear. 
The otter trawl, the oyster dredge, gill nets and line trawls 
were employed, and accurate records of the results from these 
types of fishing were made. Owing to the lack of suitable 
gear and the necessary men, no extensive seining was done. 
To obtain a fair estimate of the quantity of fish in the bay at 
any one time, many miles of seines should be set, requiring the 
services of several vessels, — an extensive and expensive under- 
taking utterly beyond the available resources. If such a pro- 
cedure could be carried out several times during the season, a 
fairly correct estimate of the quantity of fish might be ob- 
tained. As it was, the oyster boat answered its purpose in 
determining the value of the above-mentioned types of fishing, 
and records were made of the quantity, size, weight, spawn and 
food of the fish thus taken. 

In the headwaters of the bay in September several sets with 
line trawls were made in order to obtain some idea of the 
prevalence of fish in the headwaters of the bay. These records, 
however, were conducted only through the month of September, 
and were primarily intended to serve as a check upon the data 
obtained from the hand-line fishermen in the upper part of the 
bay. An effort was made to obtain all available and ac- 



36 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

credited facts from the boat liaiid-liiie fishermen in the vicinity 
of NeM^ Bedford and along the north shore of Buzzards Bay. 
However, in spite of the number of men interviewed, the 
figures cannot be considered as complete or correct indicators 
of the condition of the fisheries in the bay, and their bearing 
upcm the subject must be given only such weight as their 
source should warrant. 

3. Statistical Records. — From the records of the United 
States Bureau of Fisheries, statistics of the fisheries in Buzzards 
Bay, in Vineyard Sound and other parts of the Atlantic coast 
were obtained for 1913 to 1915 for comparison. These previ- 
ous records of the United States Fish Commission dealt chiefly 
witli the various fish frecjuenting Buzzards Bay, particularly 
the young of tlie different species which spawn in Buzzards.^Bay 
and their habitat. 

Historical Bksumk. 
In considering the conditions which have led up to the pres- 
ent situation, it is perhaps well first to analyze the law which 
closed Buzzards Bay to commercial fishing in 1893 and to 
present a brief review of the circimistances which led up to the 
closure. In tliis problem several antagonistic forces have been 
at work, namely, the menhaden fishermen and seiners, the trap 
fishermen, tlie commercial hand-line fishermen, tlie sportsman 
fishermen, the summer residents, and the members of the Old 
Colony Clul). The interests of i)ractically all tliese factions 
have been radically at variance, with the inevitable result of 
prolonged legislative strife during the past twenty years. 

Legislation. 

In 1865 an act was passed regulating the taking of menhaden 
in the waters of Buzzards Ba^- and Vineyard Sound, whereby 
the capture of menhaden by the use of purse seines in these 
waters was restricted l^efore t!ie fifteenth day of June in each 
year at the mouth of any river where a herring fishery was 
established by law. 

In 1870 an act was passed for tlie fislieries in the headwaters 
of Buzzards liay whereby no person was allowed to set or use 
anv mo\'able net or to establish anv fish weir north of a line 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 37 

drawn from the entrance of West Falmouth Harbor to Upper 
Ishmd Light, thence in a straight Hne to Great Neck Point on 
the Marion shore, under a penalty of not less than $20 and not 
more than $100 for each offence and the forfeiture of the 
offender's fishing apparatus. 

In 1874 the limits under the act of 1870 were extended to 
the waters northwest of a straight line from Angelica Point in 
the town of Mattapoisett to the central point of Ram's Island, 
then west to Mattapoisett. The provisions of this act were ap- 
plicable between the twenty-fifth day of j\Iarch and the fif- 
teenth day of May of each year. 

In 1880 it was enacted that from the first of May to the 
15th of June in each year no person should set any stationary 
apparatus for catching fish, except gill nets between the hours 
of 6 o'clock on Sunday morning and 6 o'clock on the succeed- 
ing Sunday evening, so as to catch fish in the tidal waters of 
Dukes County and of the county of Bristol and of the towns 
of Mattapoisett, Marion and Wareham, and in the tidal waters 
of the towns of Falmouth and Sandwich at and near Buzzards 
Bay. 

In 1886 an act was passed regulating the use of movable net 
apparatus in Buzzards Bay, the essential features of which are 
tlie same as exist in the present law restricting the use of mov- 
able net-fishing apparatus in Buzzards Bay. All gill netting 
was prohibited by this act except in a portion of the town of 
Fairhaven, within a line drawn from Commorant Rock south- 
west to the buoy on West Island Rips, and from thence west- 
erly in a straight line through the buoy on West Island Ledge 
to the town line of Fairhaven. It likewise did not affect in any 
way the fish weirs or the use of nets or seines in the shad and 
alewife fisheries in any of the streams emptying into Buzzards 
Bay. This act was aimed against the menhaden fishery, and 
was for the purpose of doing away with "pogy" steamers in 
Buzzards Bay. This law was carried to the Supreme Court by 
the menhaden fishermen, and the decision was rendered that 
Massachusetts could regulate her fisheries within three miles of 
her own shore in whatever manner she saw fit. The result of 
that act was to do away with menhaden fishing in Buzzards 
Bav. 



38 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

The act which restricts, at the present time, the methods of 
fishing in Buzzards Bay consists essentially of two parts, as 
follows: — 

1. The regulation of movable apparatus. This part of the 
law, in substantially the same form as at the present time, was 
passed in ISSG (chapter 192) as an act for the protection of the 
fisheries in Buzzards Bay. 

2. The regulation of stationary net apparatus, which was 
passed in 1893. In other words, the law is a composite creation 
formidated for two separate purposes, — the former for the 
prevention of menhaden fishing, the latter for the prevention 
of trap fishing. The provisions of the act (Revised Laws, 
chapter 91, sections 121 to 12(1, inclusive) as it now stands 
upon the statute book are as follows: — 

Traps prohibited in Buzzards Bay. 
Section 121. Whoever sets, uses or maintains any trap, weir, pound, 
yard or other stationary apparatus of an.y kind for the taking of fish in the 
waters of Buzzards bay or in anj^ harbor, cove or bight thereof shall be 
punished by a fine of not less than one hundred nor more than five hundred 
dollars, or by imprisonment for not more than six months. 

Nets prohibited in Buzzards Bay. 
Section 122. No person shall draw, set, stretch or use any drag net, 
set net or gill net, purse or sweep seine of any kind for taking fish in the 
waters of Buzzards bay or in any harbor, cove or bight thereof within the 
jurisdiction of this connnonwealth. Whoever violates, or aids or abets in 
the violation of, the provisions of this section shall be punished by a fine 
of not more than two hundred dollars for each offence. 

Pc))aUies. 

Section 123. A net or seine which is used in violation of the provi- 
sions of the preceding section and a boat, craft or fishing apparatus which 
is employed in such illegal use, and all fish found therewith, shall be for- 
feited. An inhabitant of a town bordeiing on said bay may seize and 
detain for not more fJian for y-eight hours any net or seine found in use 
in violation of the i:)rovisions of the preceding section, and any boat, craft, 
fishing a]>paratus and fish found therewith, so that they may be seized 
and libelled. 

When Nets are Nuisances. 

Section 124. All nets and seines in actual use which are set or stretched 
in violation of the provisions of section one hundred and twenty-two and 
one hundred and twenty-eight are declared to be common nuisances. 



1916.1 HOUSE — No. 1775. 39 



Fishing Rights in Buzzards Bay. 
Section 125. The provisions of the four preceding sections shall not 
affect the corporate rights of any fishing company situated on Buzzards 
bay, nor the use of nets or seines in lawful fisheries for shad or alewives in 
influent streams of said bay. 

Limits of Blizzards Bay. 
Section 126. In the statutes of this commonwealth the term "waters 
of Buzzards bay" shall be deemed to mean the body of water commonly 
known as Buzzards bay and extending southwesterly to a line drawn from 
Cuttyhunk lighthouse to the southerly extremity of Gooseberry neck in 
the town of Westport. 

The provisions of this act resulted in the restriction of Buz- 
zards Bay to practically all forms of fishing except hand-line 
fishing. In brief, the conditions imposed were as follows: — 

1. Trap fishing of all kinds was forbidden within the limits 
of the bay. 

2. Seines and nets of all types, except alewife seines and eel 
fykes, were forbidden. 

3. Severe penalties for the violation of the provisions of this 
act were instituted. 

4. All nets and seines set in violation of the provsions of 
this act were declared common nuisances. 

5. Apparatus and boats used in violation of this act were for- 
feited. 

6. The boundaries of Buzzards Bay were definitely limited. 

The Closure of Blizzards Bay. 
Buzzards Bay since 1892 has been entirely free from trap 
fishing and seining except for certain trap leases on the west 
side, which did not expire for some years after the law was 
passed. For this reason, in the early '90s a numl)er of traps 
were still set in Buzzards Bay in spite of the law, especially 
since several licenses were purposely granted for a term of 
years just previous to the passage of the act. During the last 
fifteen years the only fish traps in Buzzards Bay have been 
conducted by the Marine Biological Laboratory and the 
United States Bureau of Fisheries at Woods Hole, for scientific 



40 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

purposes. Just outside the ])or(Iers of Buzzards Bay traps 
liaA'e beeu set at Cuttyhunk and Mneyard Sound. 

At the present time in Buzzards Bay the Commonwealth has 
a body of water which has been })ractically closed to all net 
fishing for a period of approximately twenty years. The 
justification for this law is found in the claim that the welfare 
of the fisheries as a whole demanded its reservation for a 
breeding grounrl for the fish. Considerable doubt exists in the 
minds of many persons whether siu;h a principle is of value 
as applied to Buzzards Bay for the reason that the more 
A'aluable fish are mostly migratory, and are caught in large 
quantities elsewhere, i.e., in Rhode Island just outside the re- 
stricted areas. It was for the purj)ose of determining the true 
relation of these factors that the collection of data bearing 
upon fishing conditions in Buzzards Bay was undertaken. 

The events leading up to the })assage of the act of 1886 are 
interesting. The presence of "pogy" steamers proved a nui- 
sance to summer residents and to local fishermen, since the 
menhaden acted as food for more valuable fish, and their 
destruction in large cpiantities, as well as of other schooling 
fish, proved unpopular. For that reason little difficulty was 
encountered in restricting the use of gill nets and seines in 
Buzzards Bay. The only opposition came from the menhaden 
fishermen, especially from the large firms domiciled in Rhode 
Island. 

On the other hand, the crusade against trap fishing brought 
out a si)irit of conflict between the trap fishermen and their 
friends on one hand, and the line fishermen, summer residents 
and sportsmen, headed by the Old Colony Club, on the oppos- 
ing side. The results between the years bSSG and 1892 showed 
a gradual restriction in the use of fish traps in the various towns 
along Buzzards Bay. Beginning with the towns on the eastern 
and upper waters of the bay, permits for setting fish traps 
were restricted by special laws. Such measures were first in 
force in the towns at the headwaters of Buzzards Bay which 
had never carried on extensive trap fishing. 

In 1890 the exemption of the act of 1886 was remov'cd from 
Fairhaven, and it was declared illegal to set any movable fish 
apparatus anywhere within the waters of Buzzards Bay, thus 



191G.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 41 

practically eliminating gill netting within the entire bay. In 
1889 Fairhaven declined to set fish traps. In 1891 Fairhaven 
also voted to eliminate trap fishing, leaving only the towns 
of Mattapoisett and Dartmouth v;here trap fishing was con- 
tinued. In 1891 the provisions of the act of 1880 in respect 
to the fish weirs and the use of nets and seines in the shad and 
alewife fisheries in the streams entering Buzzards Bay was 
confirmed. 

In 1891 there was a meeting at Bourne in the interest of the 
protection of the fisheries of Buzzards Bay. Many prominent 
citizens expressed themselves in favor of doing away with trap 
fishing in Buzzards Bay. Action by the Old Colony Club 
finally took the form of the bill which, after bitter conflict, 
became a law in 1893, prohibiting trap fishing in Buzzards 
Bay. This act, intended for the better protection of the 
fisheries, stipulated that no traps, weirs, pounds or stationary 
apparatus for the taking of any kind of fish should be kept, 
maintained or used for the taking of fish in Buzzards Bay. 
It was also stipulated that the selectmen of the towns bordering 
on Buzzards Bay should have no power or authority to grant 
licenses to construct fish weirs, but that nothing should forbid 
the maintenance of fish weirs under licenses previously granted 
until the terms of such licenses expired. The argument for 
closing this body of water w'as based on tw^o points: (1) that 
Buzzards Bay was a natural spawning ground; (2) that the 
supply of fish was declining, and that trap fishing was the cause 
or at least was hastening the decline. 

The effect of the passage of the law of 1893 resulted in a 
considerable ninnber of trap fishermen being thrown out of 
employment. Previous to the passage of the law there were 
forty traps in the bay which were employing anywhere from 
two to five men each, including the employment of various 
packers and men engaged in the handling and prepara^ioa of 
the fish for market. There was, likewise, a loss in material, 
such as nets, gears and other equipment, which could not 
economically be diverted for use in the other fisheries. The 
majority of the trap fishermen, anticipating the reopening of the 
bay wathin a few years, stored their nets and gears, with the 
result that after several years they were forced to sell their 



42 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

nets at a considerable loss. To some extent the general public 
was affected by the tliniinution in the supply of fish, particularly 
among the inhabitants of shore towns. This argument was 
used with considerable effect by the advocates of trap fishing, 
who maintained that with the traps in the bay fish could be 
furnished in greater quantities and at a cheaper rate to the 
local inhabitants. However, as most of the fish was shipped 
to Boston and New York markets, the benefit to the local 
people was of little consequence. 

Fish. 
Obser\'ations upon the number, species and habits of the fish 
are of great value in considering the influence of commercial 
methods upon the fisheries of Buzzards Bay. In this connec- 
tion a study of the food conditions in Buzzards Bay — from 
the simple plankton, the floating food of the small fishes, to the 
small fish themselves, which in turn serve as food for the 
large predaceous fish • — is of importance. Therefore, consider- 
able time has been devoted to the study of existing conditions 
in regard to the alewife or branch herring fishery, especially in 
those streams which enter the headwaters of Buzzards Bay. 
It is important to know what species of fish enter the bay, at 
what seasons, and what the proportion of non-edible fish is to 
the more valuable edible fish. Other facts, which must also be 
given due consideration, are a comparison of conditions, present 
and past; whether the fish in their migrations follow the shore 
lines or are found throughout the bay; whether or not there has 
been a decline; what changes are apparent in the species and 
abundance of fish; whether the food supply has changed, and 
whether trap fishing can be carried on in Buzzards Bay without 
damage to the best interests of the fishery. Such numerous 
facts all bear in large measure upon the main problem of reserv- 
ing the bay, and are largely co-ordinated by a study of the 
statistics of the fisheries of the present time as compared with 
previous years, though due consideration must be given the 
spawning and other habits of the fish. 



1916. 



HOUSE — No. 1775. 



43 



SjJecies inhabiting Buzzards Bay. 



Alewife. 


Pilot fish. 


Barracuda. 


Pollock. 


Sea bass. 


Sharp-nosed ray. 


Striped bass. 


Large sting ray. 


Bluefish. 


Remora. 


Bonito. 


Rudder fish. 


Buttcrfish. 


Sailor 's-choice. 


Horse Crevalle. 


Salmon. 


Yellow Crevalle. 


Big-eyed scad. 


Cero. 


Mackerel scad. 


Cod. 


Sculpin. 


Gunner. 


Scup. 


Cutlass fish. 


Common sea robin. 


Smooth dogfish. 


Striped sea robin. 


Spiny dogfish. 


Common shad. 


Common eel. 


Hickory shad. 


Lamprey eel. 


Dusky shark. 


Filefish. 


Harmner-head shark. 


Summer flounder. 


Leopard shark. 


Winter flounder. 


Sand shark. 


Four-spotted flounder. 


Thresher shark. 


Hogchoker. 


Barn-door skate. 


Sand dab. 


Summer skate. 


Foolfish. 


Winter skate. 


Garfish. 


Smelt. 


Goosefish. 


Spanish mackerel. 


Common hake. 


Squeteague. 


Iving hake. 


Squid. 


Glut herring. 


Sturgeon. 


Round herring. 


Swellfish. 


Sea herring. 


Tautog. 


Engfish. 


Tomcod. 


Mackerel. 


^Miiting. 


Menhaden. 




Commercially Important Fish. 


Alewife. 


Common eel. 


Sea bass. 


Summer flounder. 


Striped bass. 


Winter flounder. 


Bluefish. 


Four-spotted flounder 


Bonito. 


Hake. 


Butterfish. 


Mackerel. 


Cod. 


Menhaden. 



44 



FISH AND FISHERIES. 



[Feb. 



Pollock. 


Squeteague. 


Salmon. 


Squid. 


Scup. 


Tautog. 


Shad. 


Tonicod. 


Smelt. 


Wliiting. 


Spanish mackerel. 




Commercially Valuable Fish now present in Paying Quantities. 


For bait: — 


Menhaden (also valuable for oil). 


Alewife (also used for food) . 


Sea herring (also used for food). 


Squid. 


For food: — 


Sea bass. 


Butterfish. 


Flounders. 


Mackerel. 


Scup. 


Squeteague. 


Tautog. 





Fish formerly important but 7iow absent or taken in Small Quantities in 

Buzzards Bay. 



Bluefish. 


Pollock. 


Bonito. 


Shad. 


Striped bass. 


Salmon. 


Cod. 


Smelt. 


Hake. 


Spanish mackerel. 


Common. No 


i-edible Fish. 


Smooth dogfish. 


Sea robins. 


Spiny dogfish. 


Sharks. 


Goose fish. 


Swellfish. 


Rays. 


Skates. 


Sculpins. 





The above list inchides the so-called non-edible species most 
commonly taken in the fish traps, the number of dogfish, sea 
robins and swellfish at times running high. These fish are a 
considerable nuisance to the fishermen in hauling the traps. 
At present these species have little commercial importance and 
are thrown away. In the future we shall undoubtedly eat many 
of these forms, but at the present time the public taste lias not 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 45 

been educated to appreciate this. type of food. The use of dog- 
fish as a food has long been advocated; skates are used in Eng- 
land; sculpins and sharks are eaten by the Italian population of 
our cities. The time is not far distant when thrift not waste 
will characterize all our fishing operations.. Many of these 
species, especially the dogfish, sharks, skates and goosefish, 
destroy enormous quantities of the most valuable species, and 
are therefore the cause of great economic waste, as well as a 
nuisance to the fishermen. 

Past Abundance. 
In considering the abundance of the catch of fish in traps in 
past years some fishermen place scup as the most numerous, 
others consider the alewife as such, with scup a close second. 
Next in order in abundance is the butterfish; then come in 
varying order tautog, flounder and sea bass. In Rhode Island, 
the catch of fish, arranged in order of their relative abundance, 
is approximately as follows: scup, sea bass, butterfish, flounders 
and mackerel; the considerable quantity of squid taken can 
hardly be classed with the edible fish. These fish, according to 
Benjamin T. Smith of South Dartmouth, have appeared in the 
traps of that neighborhood in the following order: April, herring 
and shad; May, squeteague, butterfish and mackerel; June and 
July, scup, mackerel, squeteague, flounders and bluefish, and 
in the fall, squeteague. Alvin Waite of South Dartmouth, a 
trap fisherman of many years' experience, gives the various 
species in the order of their arrival as tomcod, fiatfish, sculpin, 
glut herring, alewife, shad, sturgeon, summer flounder, four- 
spotted flounder, mackerel, hake, pollock, smelt, various species 
of shark, hickory shad, striped bass, sand dab, skate, spiny 
dogfish, tautog, menhaden, butterfish, scup, sea robin, squid, 
whiting, sciueteague, bluefish, Spanish mackerel, goosefish, king- 
fish, sea bass, bonito and herring. 

Comm ercial Imporiance. 

It is of importance to the trap fishermen that certain species 

be obtained in greater abundance than others, thereby insuring 

a more profitable return for the season's work. As an instance 

of this can be cited the catch of mackerel made by Otis B. 



46 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

Luce in his trap off Quisset Harbor, in the early part of the 
summer of 1914. The entire profit from his trap resulted from 
the catch of mackerel, which were taken in greater abundance 
than in any other trap in the bay. Fish which were formerly 
commercially important are no longer taken in Buzzards Bay 
in the quantities in which they were taken in former years. 
Beyond cpiestion there has been a decline in certain species, 
such as striped bass, bluefish and shad, which are no longer 
taken in the great numbers they were twenty, fifty or seventy- 
five years ago. On the other hand, the run of scup and butter- 
fish is perhaps more abundant than in former days, and likewise 
squeteague, which within the last fifteen years has in some 
degree taken the place of bluefish. The fisheries of Buzzards 
Bay have not remained stationary, they have been constantly 
changing, to meet varying conditions. But when we consider 
the entire fishery of the bay witli regard to the number and 
species of fish, we find that there has been a general decline, 
since certain species once of great value are now exterminated 
so far as Buzzards Bay is concerned. 

Migration. 

For many years it was the impression that the fish entered 
Buzzards Bay by following the shores, a stock argument used 
by the opponents of trap fishing to illustrate the great destruc- 
tion from trap fishing. The trap fishermen, on the other hand, 
declared that the traps took only a small portion of the fish, 
which were abundant over the bay as well as near the shore. 
It is now evident that the fish do not "strike in" by closely 
following the sliore, but move upon the shore in manner simi- 
lar to the waves of the sea, striking the shore at an angle. In 
the upper portions of the bay perhaps they may follow the 
shore in order to get to the shallow water for spawning, but 
there is no adequate proof that the shore line is followed to the 
exclusion of the otlier waters. 

The fisliermen who have been engaged for years in trap fish- 
ing state that tlie fish enter the bay on the eastern side, citing 
as proof the fact that the different species, especially mackerel 
and scup, are taken a week earlier by the traps on the Fal- 
mouth shores than at the western entrance to the bav. Un- 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 47 

questionably, after entering Buzzards Bay, owing either to the 
warmer water near the shore or some unknown cause, the fish 
frequent the shore water. For that reason the argument that 
trap fishing takes only a portion of the fish is erroneous, as the 
greater part of the fish undoubtedly lie near the shore; but it 
is evident that they enter Buzzards Bay directly from the open 
ocean and Vineyard Sound. 

Predaceous Non-edible Fish. 

The so-called non-edible fish are the smooth dogfish, spiny 
dogfish, skate, ray, sculpin, sea robin, shark, swellfish and 
goosefish. Of these, the two dogfish and the various other 
species of shark do the most damage to the fisheries. The 
voracious goosefish undoubtedly is a destructive enemy, but 
owing to its numerical inferiority it is relatively of minor im- 
portance. 

The smooth dogfish (Accmthias americanus), sometimes 
known as the dog shark or horned fish, frequents all kinds 
of bottom in the shallow waters of the bay. It is taken to 
a large extent in traps, on hand lines and occasionally in 
seines, being present from May to November, and is especially 
abundant during June. It has a length of about three feet, 
with a slender body tapering from the dorsal fin to the tail. 
The smooth dogfish differs from the spiny dogfish in the 
absence of a dorsal spine, and in having a greater size and a 
blunt head. Its food consists of Crustacea, chiefly crabs and 
small fish, especially menhaden. 

The spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias), sometimes known as 
the horned dogfish, inhabits both coasts of the Atlantic, and 
is especially common on the fishing banks. It is an infrequent 
visitor to Buzzards Bay and Vineyard Sound, in striking con- 
trast to its pestiferous abundance along other parts of the coast. 
Formerly it was very numerous in this region, in fact, to such 
an extent as to form the chief source of "fish guano," produced 
at the old Woods Hole factory. Its food consists of cteno- 
phores, squid and various other fish, such as whiting, hake, 
mackerel, etc. 

The various sharks taken from the waters of Buzzards Bay 
are the sand, hammerhead, leopard, dusky and thrasher. 



48 FISH AND FISHERIES. , [Feb. 

The sand shark {Carcharias littorali'^) is a small but voracious 
fish iuhabiting the coast from Cape Cod to Cai)e Hatteras; 
its average size is about five feet, although specimens twelve 
feet long have been obtained. It is abundant everywhere in 
the shoal waters of Vineyard Sound and Buzzards Bay from 
June to NoA'ember, and serves as a source of amusement to 
hand-line fishermen. Its food consists of lobsters, crabs, 
squid, menhaden, sea bass, scup, butterfish, flounders, alewives, 
squeteague, sea ro])ins and boni+o. 

It has long been an argument of the trap fishermen that 
traps were a benefit to the fisheries (^f Buzzards Bay in that 
they destroyed the useless predaceous fisli, and that since the 
abolition of trap fishing the number of sharks, dogfish and 
skates has markedly increased, to the detriment of the com- 
mercial fisheries. This ciuestion involves a consideration of 

(1) the mcihods of disposing of fish in the days of trap fishing; 

(2) whether they have increased or not since trap fishing has 
been abolished; {'A) how much damage these fish actually do 
to the commercial fisheries; and (4) how can this problem 
best be solved for Buzzards Bay. 

Destnietion . — In spite of the argument of the trap fisher- 
men that large numbers of dogfish, skates and sharks were 
formerly destroyed by traps in Buzzards Bay, there is no 
definite proof that the trnj) fishermen ever Inive or ever will 
destroy a sufficient number of dogfish to offset any increase. 
The trap fisherm.'ui in hauling his trap works hard, is pressed for 
time, and usually rushed to get his fish to market. If a large 
numl)er of dogfish and sharks are taken, unless they can be 
used as fertilizer or sold 'it a ])r()fit there is no incentive to 
destroy them, wliich inevitalJy results in the rapid return to 
the water of the living fish. Seiners and other fishermen show 
a similar lack of foresight in merely tossing the dogfish from 
the nets without taking time to kill them. This state of 
affairs certainly existed in the former days of trap fishing, 
since fishing is strictly a connnercial pro]wsition in which the 
fisherman has time only to do those things which will bring 
him in the greatest returns, and never can l)e in a position to 
take a great amount of time for the ])urp()se of destroying 
these fish unless opportunity is given him to market them 



1916.] HOUSE — Xo. 1775. 49 

^t a profit. In 1914 and 1915 many large sharks from the 
experimental traps in South Dartmouth were sold for food 
and fertilizer. 

Increase. — A fairly accurate idea concerning the increase 
or decrease in numbers of these different species may }>e 
obtained from a comparison of the catch of the trap of the 
United States Bureau of Fisheries for a period of sixteen 
years. This trap was located all this time in the same place, 
— south of Quisset Harbor, Buzzards Bay. Statistics indicate 
that there has been some increase in the number of certain 
non-edible predaceous fish in Buzzards Bay during the last 
sixteen years, in this way corroborating the observations of the 
fishermen. The hasty conclusion that this increase was due 
to the absence of traps should not be reached. Undoubtedly 
there hae been an increase in predaceous fish, particularly the 
dogfish, along our entire coast, as shown by the evidence 
submitted in the 1905 report of this department . A natural 
increase must be considered legitimate for Buzzards Bay when 
compared with other waters. Whether this increase is ab- 
normal is a problem difficult of solution. Buzzards Bay as a 
spawning ground and food center attracts man>' of the fish 
upon which the shark and spiny dogfish feed, and also furnishes 
an abundance of desirable food such as is favoretl by the 
smooth dogfish. Statistics from the tra]) of the United States 
Bureau of Fisheries, which, since 1N9S, has been situated for 
the months of July and August south of Quisset Harbor on the 
Falmouth shore, have shown a surprising increase in the number 
of smooth dogfish. The average per day for the five years 
between 1898 and 1902 was 1.44 dogfish; between 1900 and 
1905, 7.23 dogfish; between 1905 and 1910, 18.94 <l()gfish; 
and between 1910 and 1915, 22.24 dogfish. These statistics, 
coming from accredited sources, are of extreme importance as 
indicating an unquestionable increase in the number of smooth 
dogfish. During the sime period there was only a small 
catch of spiny dogfish, probabl.y due to the fact that this 
species arrives in larger numbers during May and October. 
In 1897 it was comparatively scarce at Woods Hole, and has 
been ever since. Insufficient data render impossible an>' 
conclusion as to its increase. The records of the Woods Hole 



50 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

tra)) show that in sixteen years 5 le()])ard sharks, 5 thrasher 
sharks, 19 hammerheads, SO (hisky sharks and a hiroer number 
of sand sharks were caught. In considering the first three 
it is impossible, owing to fhe rmall number taken, to arrive 
at any conclusion, although aboul the same mimber of hammer- 
head sharks were taken each year. It is interesting to note 
that several hammerhead sharks were taken in the experimental 
gill nets in 19b!. The dusky shark showed practically no in- 
crease or decrease, and the number was not sufficient to permit 
(•(Miclusions being drawn. Some indications of the abundance 
of sharks of tht> sand variety were obtained. The average 
catch |)er day for the five years l)etween 1S9S and 19()H w^as 
.7;!(i; l>etween 1900 and 1903, .787; between 190:) and 1910, 
.7(;(); and between 1910 and 1914, .iUO. 

I)(nii(i(/c. — The damage done by ])redaceous fish not only 
concerns the fishermen, but indirectly affects every consumer 
of sea foo(k It has been a well-nigh universal practice, con- 
forming to local market preference, to confine the fisheries to 
relatively few species, notably the mackerel, cod, salmon, 
iiluefish, strijied bass, shad, etc., and to throw overboai*d, 
either alive or dead, such fish ^s did not readily meet the 
market demands. Thus we have gone on for generations 
killing both the adults and tiie young of the fashionable food 
species, and have brought about both a local and a general 
(h'cline in certain cases. (\)nsequently, while we hnxe impaired 
the reproductive capacity of certain species by killing large 
quantities of old and young individuals, the dogfish and 
other sharks have come to be proportionately more numer- 
ous, and ha\'t> destroyed a relatively greater number of food 
fish. 

As a result of previous investigations in 1905 we found that 
50 per cent, of the total weight of fish caught were dogfish, as 
nearly as could be determined. In addition to the time lost in 
hauling up and liberating these dogfish, and the loss of oppor- 
tunity to catch marketable fish on the hooks occupied by the 
dogfish, the total actual cost of catching these dogfish amounts 
to at least -^lOO.OOO. Besides this the damage by dogfish to 
marketable fish on the hooks and in nets amounts to at least 
$250,000. At a fair estimation every dogfish which reaches 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 51 

mature size, say 5 to 7 pounds, will have eaten at least 20 
pounds (undoubtedly more) of marketable fish. ]\Iassachusetts 
fishermen catch annually at least 27,000,000 dogfish, which 
must have eaten 540,000,000 pounds of marketable fish, and 
these, even at one cent per pound, figure up to an annual 
damage in IMassachusetts waters alone of between five and, six 
million dollars. A corresponding tribute is laid by the dogfish 
upon the fisheries of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, 
New Jersev, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, 
Georgia and Florida, as well as on the Pacific coast. 

Solution. — The solution of the non-edible and predaceous 
fish problem will be found in their utilization either for food or 
for manufacturing purposes. In the last few years many ex- 
periments upon the use of the dogfish for fertilizer have been 
made, and the Federal government has investigated the pro- 
duction of oil from this species. Previous reports of this com- 
mission, issued in 1905 and 1911, have considered in detail the 
destructiveness of the dogfish and the dift'erent methods of 
utilization. The establishment of a reducing plant in Massa- 
chusetts would be in many ways a benefit to the fish indus- 
tries. 

The time will come when dogfish, sharks, skates, etc., will 
be used for food, and it is even conceivable that dogfish fins 
and tails may be put on the market in the same manner as 
shark's fins and tails are sold in China, where they are consid- 
ered a great delicacy. Some Chinese are reported as operating 
a "dried fish plant" at Santa Monica, Cal., where they preserve 
the flesh of the shark. This flesh is cut oft' in strips, sprinkled 
with sugar and placed in position on drying screens until 
cured. It is said to be considered a great delicacy, and finds 
ready sale in large quantities. Ilecently, efforts have been 
made to put sharks on the market as fresh food fish. Instances 
of sales in Boston and New Bedford markets have been re- 
corded. The flesh of the ^lark and dogfish is clean, although 
somewhat coarse, and should prove a substantial food. It is 
reported that the Italians in New York highly prize the flesh 
of the shark. 

The solution of the local Buzzards Bay problem is not in 
allowing Buzzards Bay to be reopened to trap fishing, but in 



52 FISH AND FISHERIP^S. [Pel). 

readjustment of the haiidlino; of these ])ro(lucts for commercial 
purposes. The mere presence of traps would not mean the 
destruction of these fish unless they were commercially j)rofit- 
ahle, so that the fisherman could derive a suitable revenue. 
Trap fishing to he of any value in solving the predaceous fish 
problem should be carried on during the entire summer at 
certain particidarly important ])()ints, i.e., western entrance of 
the bay, and siionld not be limited to a few early summer 
months. 

Methods ok Fishixc;. 
Under the law of 1S9;1 i)ractically all iuoval)le and statioiuiry 
seines and large nets were included, and for this reason it may 
be well to consider the difl'erent forms of jH'ohibited fishing and 
their effect nj^on the fishing conditions in Buzzards Bay. Like- 
wise, it is desirable that other forms of fishing at present used 
in Buzzards Bay be compared with the prohibited types. Tlie 
status of each fishery should be determined in regard to its 
destructiveness, and how it can best be impro^'ed for the bene- 
fit of all fishermen. 

Ilaiid-Jiitc Fishing. 

Hand-lining is a primiti\'e method of catching fish originating 
with the savage Indians. The early colonist im])roved upon 
the bark line and the bone hook of the Indians, and later snb- 
stituted th<> steel hook and string line, finally reaching the silk 
line and expcnsi^•c rod of the sporting fishermen. Whatever 
the method, fancy or simple, costlx or cheap, it is hand-line 
fishing, and every lover of fishing, whether for sport or for a 
livelih.ood, (Mijoys it. The usual ])rocedure is to go to the fish- 
ing grounds in a boat, anchor and })roceed to fish, sometimes 
with a rod, more often with a simiple hand-line. In certain 
favorable localities it is })ossil)h' to fish from bridges or from the 
shores. The Aarions fishing grounds in Buzzards Bay are nu- 
merous, although perha])s the most noted is (develand's Ledge. 

From the testimony of j)ersons who have liAcd for years on 
the shore of Buzzards Bay hand-line fishing has declined. The 
catches of fish at tli(> lu'esent tinu' are much smaller than in 
former years on the same grounds, if reliance can be placed on 
testimon^' of this sort, and in this case it should be of value. 



1016.1 HOUSP: — No. 1775. 53 

Haiul-line fishing, both as a sport and as a business, has de- 
chned. This dechne lias been rather in the amount of catch 
than in the number of fishermen. Statistics of the hand-hne 
fishery at the present time are hard to obtain, and it is practi- 
cally impossible to make an accurate estimation of the total 
catch in Buzzards Bay so numerous and so irreguhir are the 
fishing parties. 

Hand-lining is, of all means, the least destructive method of 
fishing. The number of fish thus taken are less than with all 
other kinds, but it is less adaptable for market fishing than the 
more rapid methods. The fish usually taken with the hand- 
line are tautog, scup and flounders, occasionally bluefish and 
squeteague. The arguments in favor of hand-line fishing 
are — 

1. Hand-lining would attract numerous summer visitors. In 
1892 this was an excellent argument, but in 1918 to 1915 -it is 
of little value, as summer people would come to 13uzzards Bay 
any way, because of its other attractions. 

2. Hand-line fishing would favor the poor man and enable 
him to obtain a living. At the present day a man industrious 
enough to get a living by hand-lining would be able to get a 
living at any work. 

:]. Hand-line fishing is not destructive. 

Tra irl-linc Fishing. 
The trawl line consists of a ground line to which are attached 
the "ganging," which consists of a short line of about three 
feet, with hooks. At each end of the ground line is an anchor 
to which buoys are attached. The trawl line used in 1913 in 
Buzzards Bay by this department had approximately three 
hundred hooks. The trawl is baited and coiled in a tub ready 
to set when the fishing schooner reaches the grounds. This 
method of fishing is used extensively by line fishermen, both in 
deep and shallow water fishing, and is little more than an ex- 
tension of the hand-line method. The bait usually consists of 
fish, clams, squid, cockles, etc. In the work in Buzzards Bay 
the baits used were cockles, scallops, clams, hermit crabs and 
fish. Various experiments were made with the dift'erent kinds 
of bait to determine the success of the dift'erent varieties. It 



54 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

was therefore necessary to count the hooks when haiiHng the 
trawl in order to obtain a record of the effectiveness of each 
kind of bait. In small bodies of water, snch as Buzzards Bay, 
the fishing grounds are usually selected near ledges or on a 
rocky bottom. In the experimental work the trawl was usualh' 
run from a rocky bottom to an adjacent mud or san.d area for 
the purpose of comparing the results of the catch. 

The catch for the summer, arranged in order of abundance, 
consisted of smooth dogfish, tautog, sea bass, toad fish, scup, 
summer floun(hn' and cunner, which were caught in diti'erent 
parts of the bay during the month of August. The results that 
were obtained from the use of different kinds of bait were as 
follows. It is hardly fair to draw any definite conclusions from 
results covering such a limited scope, but these facts were 
brought out. 

1. Contrary to the prevailing opinion that tautog i)ref erred 
hermit crabs for bait, it was found that on the trawl lines a 
larger number were taken with the cockle or winkle as bait. 

2. Sea bass were evifk>ntly omnivorous, large numbers of 
mud crabs l)eing found in their stomachs. 

It. Dogfish were ])ractically the only fish caught in any 
iRimber with fisii fsait, iii(Hcating the proba.ble damage to 
trawl-line fishing. 

4. The summer flounder was caught chiefly with the cockle. 

o. Scu]) ^vere taken in relatively few Jiumbers, altliough they 
were abundant in the traps at tiiat time. 

The recorrls of the trawls set in the upper ])art of the bay 
between August 19 and Se]^'t(nnber 25, on both rocky and 
sandy bottoms, at Dry Ledge, Little Bird Island, Four Buoys 
and Weweantic River, when fiddler crabs and fish were used 
for l)ait, sfiowed a catch consisting of toad fish, dogfish, tautog 
and eels, arranged in the order of abundance. 

From the records upon the line of trawl fishing, it can be 
stated that while this method is superior to the ordinary hand- 
fining, the results were far from satisfactory. Indications were 
that it would hardly be profitable for any man to make an 
extensive livelihood from line fishing in the ba}'. However, 
the good fishing grounds were not selected in Buzzards Ba\', as 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 55 

the trawl was set in different places each day, and the catch 
therefore would be very much less than if the method were 
pursued steadily on the regular fishing grounds. The object 
of the investigation with the trawl was to determine the 
abundance of the fish caught by this method in the various 
parts of the bay, and not to determine how great a quantity 
could be obtained from the choice fishing ground in the bay. 
However, it is sufficient to show that the abundance of fish 
in Buzzards Bay which can })e taken by line fishing is much 
less than in former years. 

The Gill Net. 

This type of fishing was first introduced in the early part of 
the nineteenth century, and in 1880 became in general use 
among the fishermen, possibly owing to the difficulty of secur- 
ing adequate bait for line fishing. It is an extremely useful 
method of fishing, and in recent years, if permitted, would 
have been of great aid to the lobster fishermen in Buzzards 
Bay in obtaining menhaden for bait. These fish are abundant 
during the summer months in Buzzards Bay and are readily 
taken in quantities in gill nets. The gill net, such as used 
in the experimental work in the bay, w^as of the mackerel 
type, which could not be set in less than three fathoms of 
water. 

The use of the gill net in Buzzards Bay in 1913 did not prove 
a financial success. The principal catch consisted of menhaden, 
and this fish readily succumbs to the warm weather, thus 
demanding that the net be hauled each day. The gill nets 
were usually set at the middle of the bays and coves. The 
largest catches were obtained at the mouth of the bay. Among 
the fish taken in the gill net may be enumerated, in order of 
their abundance, menhaden, butterfish, dogfish and sand sharks. 

It is hoped that some method may be devised whereby the 
lobster fishermen in Buzzards Bay may be given an opportunity 
to set gill nets for menhaden in order to obtain a supply of 
fresh lobster bait. By certain restrictions as to the time of 
catch in the summer and as regards the type of net little 
damage will be done to the other fisheries of the bay. Butter- 



56 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

fish, bluefisli, sciip and mackerel can be caught in gill nets, but 
unless exceptional conditions exist during the middle of the 
summer the lobster men should be able to set these seines 
Avithout seriously interfering with any fish but the menhaden. 

Seminfi. 

There are several types of seines in use, the principal form 
being the purse seine, such as is used in the menhaden fishery, 
and the drag seine. These different types have gradually been 
developed from the primiti\'e drag net. Practically all surface 
and free-swimming fish can be taken by this method. 

It would have been eminently desirable, in order to obtain 
figures upon the abundance of fish in Buzzards Bay in any 
one season, to have had an appropriation sufficient to enable 
this department to hire a large schooner, with a full equipment 
of seines, to make a set in different portions of the bay on a 
large scale, in order to obtain an approximate idea of the 
quantity of fish in Buzzards Bay. The abundance of fish, 
except as shown by the traps, will never be known in Buzzards 
Bay until some method of wholesale seining is experimentally 
employed. 

The use of seines in Buzzards Bay was chiefly confined to 
menhaden fishing, which was abolished in 1886, when the 
use of seines was forbidden. The majority of the fishermen 
consider that the wholesale capture of menhaden by the pogy 
steamers would be objectionable, as it would destroy the food 
which serves to entice the larger fish to the waters of Buzzards 
Bay. Likewise, other fish were said to be taken with the 
menhaden. The main arguments in favor of the menhaden 
fishery seem to rest upon the furnishing of fertilizer to the 
farmers and the establishment of an industry which would 
employ men in or near the shore towns. The oil is used for 
tanning leather and in the manufacture of soap and paint oil. 
The rest of the fish is used for fertilizer. 

Buzzards Bay should never be opened to seining in such a 
manner that it would permit the entrance of menhaden steam- 
ers. The supply of fish at the present time in the bay is too 
small to allow any depletion b^^ this method, and the fishermen 



1^ 


J^B^^ 






.■- , 


>»o"^ff 4 ^^^H 






1 


M '^ i^^E^^^^I 


^^^"^ iB^ 




p * 


^B 1 J - -wl^* 






.i^^l 


lift^ 


■H^^,^ 




^ 'i^B 


H^v * ^ ^ 


^^^^H^s 


^ 


r^^'-^^ 


^■flU . / ^^H 


^^^^^^H 




.^m'^^^B 




^H^^^^^^^^^H 


I^V 


|. -/IM 




i^^^l 


^Bfi 


>4 •^' 'IrB 




I^^^^^H 


^^r 


^■t^"'' fsl 




^^^^^^^^1 


^^Ih '* 


^s^^MBH, ' ^^I^Bll 


L^^vW' .M^^^l 


^^^^^^^^^^^^^H 


Hik''' 


^n B|f\ 


IL l^Hi^^^^^^^^^^l 


^^^^^^^^^^^1 


^^^|E^^'4 




tJ^^^^^K 


V^^H 


i 


^. ^ !/■ 


t 'K^^^^^^^^^^^l 


l^^lj^^H 


f 




^^^BV^^ 


' ^ 


L 



Gill net with menhaden. 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 57 

do not desire this type of fishing to be resumed. The summer 
residents are opposed to it, and the consensus of opinion is that 
menhaden seining in Buzzards Bay would be of Httle vahie to 
the industries of ^Massachusetts. 



River Fishing. 

Small seines and dip nets are permitted under the present 
law hi the streams entering Buzzards Bay for the purpose of 
taking alewives, and eel fykes are allowed. Except for purely 
local regulations by the different towns the law does not 
interfere with taking alewives or eels in the streams entering 
the bay. Nevertheless, it is important, for the continuation 
and development of the alewife fishery, that proper measures 
and regulations be enacted. 



Offer Trawl. 

In 1893, as a result of the report on the "Beam Trawl 
Fishery of Great Britain," by Capt. J. W. Collins, published 
by the United States Commission in 1889, the use of the beam 
trawls for catching flounders hom sail boats was unflertaken 
at Provincetown. This method has now extended along 
the south side of Cape Cod and as far north as Salem. The 
beam trawl has been supplanted within the past fe^^' years 
by the more serviceable otter trawl. The use of the otter 
trawl was prohibited by law in the waters of Buzzards Bay. 
For the purpose of investigation, a gasolene oyster dredger 
equipped with two otter trawls from 55 to (JO feet in width 
was used in 1913, and a large portion of the bay was covered. 
The speed of the boat was about three miles an hour when 
dragging the net. The average time the net was down was 
thirty-five minutes. The actual working width of the net v;as 
estimated as 40 feet. 

The results of the use of the otter trawl may be summarized 
as follows : — 

1. The trawling ground in Buzzards Bay consists of a small 
area centering about Cleveland's Ledge. 

2. The rough bottom due to rocks and possibly wrecks makes 



58 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

trawling in Buzzards Bay impracticable, although it is possible 
that with men who knew thoroughly the character of the bot- 
tom in different jiarts of the bay it might be profitable to use 
the otter trawl, but in the majority of cases the character of 
the bottom is such as to render trawling an expensive under- 
taking, owing to the destruction of the nets. 

3. The varieties of fish obtained in the otter trawl between 
July 18 and August 13 were w^inter flounder, summer floun- 
der, four-spotted flounder, sand dab, skates, dogfish, whiting, 
hake, puffer and sea robin. At no time was a sufficient quan- 
tity of these fish taken for marketing. 

4. Buzzards Bay should be fished in colder weather if any 
jjrofit is to be obtained from this method of fishing, owing to 
the fact that the chief source of revenue is derived from the 
winter flounder, which during the summer months was not 
found in any abundance. 

5. Numerous species of fish ])robably can avoid being taken 
in the slow-moving trawl, and those fish that inhabit the rocky 
ledges camiot be taken, from the fact that the bottom is un- 
suited for the manipulation of the net. 

6. To determine whether the smaller species might not be 
entrapped in the otter trawl and ])assed through the meshes of 
the net a fine-meshed bag was attached to the free end. The 
results show that ])ractically no small fish were taken. 

7. By the use of buoys it was possible to operate the otter 
trawl at \'arious depths in the water. The results of the hauls 
made at various levels above the bottom were entirely nega- 
tive, as no fish were taken. Howe\'cr, with a fast-moving boat 
and larger net it is conceivable that certain fish might be taken 
by such a method. The limited observations that were made 
indicate that tliis metluxl of supra-bottom fishing is imprac- 
ticable. 

8. It is evident that by trawling there is great danger of the 
commercial extirpation of the slow-moving winter flounder. 
The flounder is a migratory fish only in the sense that it 
changes from near localities, and it can be nearly totally de- 
stroyed in a)iy confined territory, such as a small bay. Un- 
questionably the small otter trawl can destroy the flounder 
fishing in a limited locality, and it will be interesting to note 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 59 

the effect of their present introduction upon the abunchince of 
the winter flounder in Vineyard Sound and on the south side 
of Cape Cod. In tliis respect the small trawl is proving a 
greater menace than the more widely famed deep-sea trawl, 
and it is earnestly hoped that some means of restricting the 
use of the small type in different localities in southern Mas- 
sachusetts may be devised in order to save from complete ex- 
termination the flounder fishing. 

The Oyster Dredge. 

Dredgings were made in different parts of Buzzards Bay with 
the oyster dredges to determine the availability of the bottom 
for oyster culture. By the use of the dredge a fair idea of the 
prevalence of starfish and oyster drills, the quantity of shells 
and the character of the bottom in different parts of the bay 
could be obtained. 

In making the records of the different localities in the bay, a 
chart divided into numbered squares was made, so that the 
exact location of any dredging or trawling could be determined. 
In this way it was possible to obtain a considerable number of 
charted observations which may be of \'alue later on in the 
development of the bay for oyster culture. The results of the 
dredgings indicate that there are large areas in the bay ap- 
parently suitable for oyster culture on a large scale. 

Trap Fishing. 

Trap fishing is the result of a gradual evolution. In its 
most primitive form among the Indians the fish trap or weir 
consisted of a framework of poles intertwined and interspersed 
with twigs and withes. The name of the Ware I\i^'er arose 
from the presence of the old Indian fish weirs, and in Hingham 
the Weir River evidently has derived its name from a similar 
source. The colonists soon imitated the Indians by placing in 
the coastal streams the different forms of weirs, and as time 
went on extended the fishing to the salt water. Along the 
coast of Maine this type of weir was used for years. The use of 
netting brought about modifications on the old style of weirs, 
and a gradual improvement in the type. 

At the present time in Massachusetts there are several types. 



60 FISH AND FISHERIPIS. [Feb. 

On the north shore of Cape Cod the fish trap is locally known 
as a weir, and varies in that it is situated on the outer edge of 
flats exposed at low tide, owing to the lOf feet rise and fall. 
The fishermen drive with their wagons to the traps at low tide 
and remove the fish, a much easier process than wdiere the 
fisherman is required to liaul his traj) in deep water. Oft' 
Sakonnet Point, Uhode Island, floating traps anchored and 
buoyed but not supported by wooden poles are used. In Buz- 
zards Bay the typical trap has a 500 to (iOO foot leader stretched 
on wooden poles. At the termination of this leader is a re- 
ceptacle known as the "heart," into which the fish are directed 
by the leader. FVom the heart there is an opening into the 
"bowl," where the fish are finally caught, and often there is an 
additional pound or pocket for holding the fish for the market. 

The traps should be adapted to the locality in which they 
are placed, as it is necessary to have the netting close to the 
bottom and well leaded to catch flatfish. Likewise, the netting 
of the trap should ))roject above the water at high tide. The 
trap consists of a leader usually GOO feet long or of variable 
length, according to the size of the trap and the distance from 
the shore. Poles for the leader, usually oak, hard pine, ash, 
maple, spruce, cherry or hickory, range from 50 cents to $2 
apiece, and are driven at 20 to 30 foot inter\'als. The length 
of the poles range from 10 to 40 feet, according to the depth of 
the water. In an ordinary trap 10 poles are used in the 
"heart," IG in the "bowl," and from 35 to 200 would be used 
in building a trap, the number varying according to the size. 
The body of the traj) ranges from 25 to 40 feet, some being 
square, others rectangular or even circular in form. The cost 
of driving these poles by sand pump or piledriver averages 
about 50 cents a pole, the amount of lal)or necessarily varying 
with the consistency of the soil. 

The mesh used for the body of the trap is usually ;>-inch, 
although lir-inch mesh is occasionally used for eels and 21- 
inch for squid. The twine is considered as about one-third the 
value of the entire trap, and about (iOO pounds are necessary 
for the average trap. Xine to twenty-four thread twine, at a 
price of 27 to 40 cents per pound, is used. The average 
length of life of the tarred netting ranges from two and one- 



19](>.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 61 

half ti) three years. Prices run from .$450 to $500, and even 
as high as $1,000, for the larger traps. Double traps with 
short leaders are occasionally used. The gross stocking of a 
trap is about $1,000 a year, while the net stock is from $450 
to $700, according to the labor and expense. There are great 
fluctuations in the catch in various years, in some seasons the 
traps yielding a large catch, in others scarcely paying expenses. 
Nevertheless, these traps pay a fairly steady income and a 
fairly good living to the men engaged in the business. 

The floating traps ofl' Sakonnet are generally considered to be 
worth $1,000 apiece, although some of them are probably not 
worth much over $800. Some are SO feet deep, 120 feet wide 
and 70 feet long, with leaders 1,800 feet in length. A 4-inch 
mesh is used at the back of the floating traps which is said 
to allow the small fish to swim away unharmed; 5 to 10 inch 
mesh forms the leader, although a number of the traps ha\^e 
8-inch mesh. The floating traps are set from 12 to 18 fathoms 
deep. The season usually lasts from May 1 to July 1, and in 
the fall from August 15 to November 1, when a smaller number 
of traps are used in the water. 

In Buzzards Bay the first traps are reported to have been 
set at Gooseberry Neck in Westport in 1858. This early 
trap was an anchored traj). Later, a trap Avas located on the 
Elizabeth Islands. In 1808 the first trap was placed on 
Sconticut Neck by Mr. S. P. Dunn. The body of this trap was 
30 feet square, and it was situated in 20 feet of water. It 
was put out under the direction of a man from Rhode Island, 
and was followed by a second trap at a cost of $135 fc)r the 
trap proper and $292.99 for setting and other equipment. 
Returns from this trap were especially good during the first 
two years, the largest catch being alewives, which brought 
down the condemnation of the citizens of Mattapoisett, since 
they considered that it interfered with their river alewife 
fishery. 

In 1870 a trap was placed by Seth Thomas west of ^lachaum 
Point, close to the location of the present trap of B. T. Smith. 
This was followed by a trap in Clark's Cove by John Haines, 
presumably near the location of the present trap of William 
T. Dunn. The first trap at Nonquit was set in 1895. 



1)2 



FISH AND FISHERIES. 



[Feb. 



Fish Traps //c Jh<zzards Bay. — T 
ill Buzzards Bay during 1913, 1914 
the numbers corresi)onding to their 

1. Jolrn F. Fish, Jr., . 

2. Benjamin T. Smith, 
o. Benjamin T. Smith, 

4. Alvin F. Waite, 

5. Alvin F. Waite, 
(). WilUam T. Dunn, . 
7. William T. Dmm, . 
S. Otis B. Luce, .... 
9. United States Bureau of Fisheries 

10. H. Nelson Luce, 

11. Marine Biological Laboratory, 

12. 0. B. Daggett, . . 
18. D. P. Bosworth it Co., , 

1913 



he ex})erimeiital fish traps 
and 1915 were as follows, 
location on the map : — 

. Horse Neck Beach. 

. Machaum. 

. Machaum. 

. Salter's Point. 

. Salter's Point. 

. Riclvetson's Point. 

. Clark's Cove. 

. Quisset Harbor. 

. Woods Hole. 

. Penzance, Woods Hole. 

. LTncatena Island. 

. Naushon Island. 

. Cuttvhunk Island. 



OWXKH. 


Serial 
Num- 
ber. 


Num- 
ber of 
Traps. 


Date ^^ff 
^''*- 1 moved. 


Num- 
ber of 
Days 
down. 


Finan- 
cial 
Re- 
turns. 


State 
Reve- 
nue. 


W. T, Dunn 

M:irinc nioi(i<;ii';il Lalioratory, 


6-7 
11 


2 

1 


Juh- 7 
June 12 


Dec. 22 
Oct. IS 


168 
8,5 


$270 54 
300 06 


- 


Total, .... 


- 


.3 




- 


253 


S570 60 


- 



1914. 



Marine Biological Lalitjratory, 


11 




May 


10 


Oct. 


31 


174 


$922 44 


$64 57 


W. T. Dunn, . 


tl-7 




May 


]G 


Oct. 


20 


157 


343 14 


24 02 


Dtis n. Luce, ... 


s 




May 


10 


Aug. 


19 


1(11 


1,760 06 


123 20 


i). I'. Uosworth A: Co., . 


13 




Maj- 


fl 


July 


10 


41) 


1,069 ,S6 


74 89 


Hciijaiiiin T. Suiit h. 


2 




June 


15 


Nov 


12 


150 


644 57 


45 12 


Alvin Wail.. 


4 




May 


25 


Oct. 


31 


159 


478 43 


33 49 


. Total 


- 




- 


- 


790 


S5,21S 50 


8365 29 



\V. T. Dunn, 

.John U. Fi^h, Jr., . 
II. Xelsoii Luce, 
i.>li.s n. Luce, . 
Marine Riolo^ical Lai 
Hcnjaiuin T. .^laitli, 
<)lie<l Dagseti. 
Ah in \Vai(f, . 
Total, 







1915. 
















6-7 


2 


Mar. 


26 


Oct. 


28 


215 


.?161 00 


$11 27 




1 




May 


23 


Nov. 


6 


167 


921 30 


64 49 




1(1 




May 


6 


Sept 


23 


155 


595 93 


68 47 




8 




May 


6 


Sept 


23 


140 


824 48 


57 71 


H.ralnry, 


11 




May 


15 


Nov. 


5 


160 


405 29 


28 37 




2-3 




Apr. 


12 


Sept 


30 


!7I 


728 09 


50 96 




12 




U:iy 


12 


Nov. 


9 


181 


471 43 


33 00 




4-5 




Apr. 


22 


Oct. 


28 


189 


522 00 


36 54 




- 


11 


- 


- 


1,378 


$5,011 77 


S350 81 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 63 

The Effect of Trap Fishincj. — The question as to whether 
trap fishing pays commercially at the present time is some- 
what difficult to answer adequately in three years, with only 
a limited number of traps in the bay. Whether with a large 
number the experimental traps would have yielded it less is 
difficult to say, but indications point to the fact that there 
would have been some diminution in the average catch. The 
results in the past three summers are hardly as favorable as 
twenty years ago. The best paying trap in Buzzards Bay 
during 1914 was that of Otis B. Luce, at Quisset Harbor. 
This trap in the early part of the summer obtained large 
ciuantities of mackerel, and from this source was able to make 
a fairly good season. The Marine Biological trap and the trap 
of the United States Fish Commission were not run essentially 
for commercial purposes, and therefore the results from these 
traps can hardly be estimated in terms of dollars and cents. 
However, with the Marine Biological Laboratory the catch 
for 1914 was better than the 1913 catch, but on the whole 
it hardly paid the cost of maintenance. With the traps of 
William T. Dunn the result of the catch as rendered indicated 
that commercially there was no profit in trap fishing at his 
location; as it was conducted the yield was insufficient to pay 
for the cost of the traps and the labor involved. The results 
from the traps of Alvin Waite and Benjamin Smith in South 
Dartmouth indicate more favorable conditions. These men 
reported that the catch of 1914 compared favorably with the 
catch in former years, and that indications were such that 
it would pay to continue trap fishing. However, their profits 
were not very great for 1914. The trap of David P. Bosworth 
of Cuttyhunk was fairly successful, but if compared with the 
large catches of former years in this locality the results for 
1914 were little better than fair. 

To sum up the results from a commercial standpoint it can 
be said that trap fishing is not remunerative, but that it 
gives sufficient promise to the trap fishermen so that the 
persons having the traps are anxious to continue. When 
compared with the catch in former years, as shown by the 
returns at this office, there is no question that the yield at 
the present time is much less, in spite of the higher price of 
fish and the facilities for marketing. 



64 FISPI AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

Trap fishing evidently paid before the bay was closed, but if 
any reliance can be placed on testimony there had been a 
steady diminution in the traps during the last few years before 
1S93. It can jirobably never pay to such an extent as formerly, 
but unquestionably trap fishing can be carried on at a slight 
profit at the present time in Buzzards Bay, but it is doubtful 
whether any extensive operation with ;>. large number of trajis 
can ever be conducted. 

The decline of the catch in trap fishing and the decline of the 
fisheries in general is attributed to several sources. 

1. The increase in pollution, esj^ecially in the vicinity of 
the Acushnet River, is thought by many fishermen to have 
driven away the fish which once frequented these waters. 
The catch in the traps near New Bedford and the k)w returns 
l)ossibly can })e explained from this standpoint. 

2. The argument is advanced by fishermen that motor boats 
drive away the fish. This argument, however, is of little 
value, according to the investigations of Prof. G. II. Parker 
at Woods Hole, since he found that motor l)oats had little if 
any effect on the fish. 

3. The increase in the number of sharks, dogfish and other 
injurious fish is given as one of the causes of the depletion of 
the su])ply of food fish, and is stated by the trap fishermen as 
an argument for the extension of traj)s in order to destroy 
these swimming foes. 

4. The increase in tra])s, especially near Cape Hatteras and 
the New Jersey shores, and the encroachment of Rhode Island 
traps off Sakonnet Point, is perhajis the most important reason 
for the decline of the fisheries in Buzzards Bay. 

o. In general there has been a decline of the fisheries along 
the entire coast and the decline in Buzzards Bay is only part 
of a general decline. With certain species of fish explanation, 
of changes in their migratory habits from sources external 
about Buzzards Bay probal)l\' can account for the variation in 
their iittendance, and in a large measure account for their 
scarcity'. 

The destruction of small fish in the traj)s is a fairly ini])ortant 
item. The trap fishermen cannot afford to take time to 
pro])erly sort the small fish from the large. Naturally, quanti- 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 65 

ties just undersized are taken to market and thrown out as 
unfit for sale. The very small fish usually come in compara- 
tively large schools, and they can be liberated by the fisher- 
men by emptying the entire trap if time is taken. 

At the Marine Biological Laboratory at Woods Hole attempts 
were made to screen these fish with certain sized mesh, but 
this method proved impracticable. Accurate figures cannot be 
obtained as to the destruction of the small fish, but in all 
probability it is much larger than appears on the surface, and 
far larger than is claimed by the trap fishermen. In the most 
carefully tended traps, where time was not the factor that it 
is in traps run for commercial purposes, it was found that con- 
siderable quantities of small fish were wasted in this manner, 
both by being destroyed in the boats or with the other fish when 
they were packed for market. It is one of the most important 
arguments against trap fishing that can be advocated, and until 
trap fishermen devise suitable means and use suitable care in 
preserving the young fish, trap fishing will always in this way 
be of more or less menace to the fisheries. 

Rhode Island Trap Fishing. — Rhode Island is primarily a 
fishing State, because of her. commanding situation in the 
western and northern waters of Vineyard Sound. The men- 
haden seining and the trap fishing, which have been developed 
to a marked extent in that State, have been detrimental to the 
fisheries of Massachusetts, especially in the influence exerted 
upon Buzzards Bay. Rhode Island traps, which block the 
entrance to Buzzards Bay, have an important bearing upon the 
question of maintaining this body of water as a reservation. 
While Buzzards Bay has been closed as a breeding reservation, 
trap fishing has steadily developed in Rhode Island, and a line 
of floating traps has gradually extended out until it now prac- 
tically blocks the entrance to Buzzards Bay. For this and 
other reasons, trap fishing in Buzzards Bay will never produce 
the quantity of fish which it should normally yield. 

The following tables and statements show the great increase 
in the number of traps off Sakonnet Point, blocking the en- 
trance to Buzzards Bay: — 



66 



FISH AND FISHERIES. 



[Feb. 



Date. 


Provi- 
dence 
River. 


East 
Green- 
wich. 


West 
Pas- 
sage. 


Mount 
Hope 
Bay. 


East 
Pas- 
sage. 


Off- 
shore. 


Block 
Island. 


Watch 
HiU. 


Sakon- 

net 
River. 


Total. 


1870, 


6 


1' 


4' 


3> 


4 


- 


- 


- 


19 


37 


1879, 


3 


- 


11 


1 


10 


9 


- 


- 


7 


47 


1898, 


4 





20 


9 


15 


25 


- 


- 


34 


119 


1899, 


3 


10 


23 


11 


15 


24 


- 




35 


121 


1900, 


4 


16 


24 


16 


12 


29 


- 


- 


34 


135 


1901, 


7 


1.5 


24 


13 


14 


26 


- 


- 


52 


151 


1902, 


6 


22 


27 


13 


14 


27 


- 


- 


52 


161 


1903, 


7 


21 


32 


13 


16 


30 


- 


- 


72 


195 


1904, 


6 


27 


33 


7 


14 


49 


6 


- 


78 


220 


1905, 


6 


20 


33 


11 


20 


56 


6 


- 


82 


240 


1906, 


6 


35 


27 


11 


20 


64 


6 


- 


SO 


249 


1907, 


7 


37 


30 


12 


22 


70 


6 


- 


87 


271 


1908, 


7 


38 


32 


12 


22 


73 


- 


- 


87 


271 


1909, 


7 


31 


32 


12 


26 


73 


8 


- 


88 


277 


1910, 


9 


29 


26 


14 


20 


712 


8 


18 


92 


287 



1 Estimated number for that district. 

2 Previous to 1910 "offshore" division includes traps in the Watch Hill District. 



In the 1900 report of the Rhode Island Commissioners of 
Inland Fisheries for the year 1900 is the following statement: — 

It is certainly worthy of note that while Rhode Island is profiting by 
her one hundred fish traps, giving employment to many of her residents 
and receiving a generous income from her exports, Buzzards Bay, although 
offering no greater inducement to the hook and fine fishermen, is yielding 
little or nothing because of the closure of the area to the trap fishermen 
by legislative enactment. 

In the report of 1906 the following statement appeared: — 

The distance which the traps have been placed from shore has increased 
very markedly. The immense traps of the Fisheries Company last season 
extended in an unbroken line for a distance of three miles from Sakonnet 
Light, and the results of the past season's fishing have caused the fisher- 
men to decide to still further extend their traps in the coming year. Off- 
shore fishing has also been carried on later in the fall, with good success. 



In the report for 1909 the Rhode Island commissioners 
stated : — 



1916.1 



HOUSE — No. 1775. 



67 



Especially noticeable is the continued increase in the number of the 
Sakonnet River and offshore divisions, where the cordon of traps is being 
extended and covers new territory each year. The fishermen are con- 
tinuing to push their traps a surprisingly great distance offshore. 



Fish Shipments from Newport. 



Date. 


Production 
(Barrels). 


Traps. 


Average 
per Trap 

(Barrels). 


May and 

June 

Production 

(Barrels). 


May and 

June 
Average 
per Trap 
(Barrels). 


1898, 


34,065 


119 


286.2 


20,251 


170.7 


1899, 












34,917 


121 


2.88.5 


19,916 


164.5 


1900, 












38,184 


1.35 


282.8 


25,778 


190.9 


1901, 












50,500 


151 


334.4 


35,810 


237.1 


1902, 












53,986 


161 


3.53.3 


31,898 


198.1 


1903, 












54,382 


195 


278.8 


33,944 


174 


1904, 












62,106 


220 


282.3 


35,869 


163.0 


1905, 












50,127 


240 


208.8 


26,531 


110 6 


1906, 












60,855 


249 


244.4 


30,396H 


122.1 


1907, 












59,674 


271 


220.2 


30,653 


113.1 


1908, 












48,814 


271 


180.1 


27,9.50 


103.1 


1909, 












46,031 


277 


166.2 


27,087 


97.7 


1910, 












53,154 


287 


185.2 


29,786 


103.8 



Date. 


Total Traps. 


Offshore. 


Per Cent. 
Offshore. 


1898, . 




119 


25 


21.0 


1899, . 
















121 


24 


19.9 


1900, . 
















135 


29 


21.5 


1901, . 


















151 


26 


17.2 


1902, . 


















161 


27 


16.7 


1903, . 


















195 


30 


15.4 


1904, . 


















220 


49 


22,0 


1905, . 


















240 


56 


23 3 


1906, . 


















249 


64 


25.7 


1907, . 


















271 


70 


25.8 


1908, . 


















271 


73 


26.9 


1909, . 


















277 


73 


26.3 


1910, . 


















2S7 


89 


31.0 



68 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

The floating traps at Sakonnet are open at both sides. They 
run oft'shore in a wedgeHke fashion, the two sides of the tri- 
angle forming what are known as the "firing hnes." These 
floating traps are practically connected, as but a small space is 
left between them. The traps located within the "firing 
lines" catch but a small portion of the fish, the outer line tak- 
ing the majority. In previous years efforts have been made to 
put a bill through the Rhode Island Legislature which would 
allow for a space of 3,000 feet between adjoining traps and 
limit the length of the leaders to 2,000 feet, but opposing 
interests have been too strong and the bill has successively been 
defeated. The object of this measure was to enable a certain 
percentage of the fish to run the gauntlet of outer traps for 
the benefit of the inside traps and for spawning purposes. 

From the accompanying map it may readily be seen that the 
great increase in offshore traps by their present position blocks 
approximately two-thirds of the western entrance of Buzzards 
Bay, thus seriously depleting the number of fish freciuenting 
this body of water for spawning, and thereby nullifying to a 
considerable extent the benefits of such a reservation. Federal 
regulation of these traps would be a great advantage to Mas- 
sachusetts. 

Pollution. 
A report upon the effects on the fisheries of conditions exist- 
ing in the vicinity of the bay would indeed be incomplete with- 
out reference to pollution and the employment of tributaries for 
purposes other than fishing and ordinary navigation, and the 
consequent subordination of fishing interests to other interests. 
Investigation indicated that the fisheries of the bay are im- 
paired to some extent when the bay is used as an accessory in 
the disposal of waste and sewage from — 

1. Immediate sources, as in the case of towns or manufac- 
turing plants located on the shore front which have placed 
sewer outlets in the tide waters of the bay. 

2. Remote sources, as is the case when polluting material 
enters the bay after having first been discharged into tributary 
streams. 



1916.1 HOUSE — No. 1775. 69 



Immediate Sources. 

The immediate sources of pollution can best be set forth by 
discussing separately each town bordering on the bay, and 
stating the character and quantity of pollution from each town. 

New Bedford is a serious offender. This city discharges sew- 
age from 36 outlets into New Bedford Harbor and from 9 
outlets into Clark's Cove. In addition, the harbor waters 
receive waste directly from 25 manufacturing establishments, 
w^hich is discharged through private sewers; and Clark's Cove 
receives the waste from 5 cotton mills. In the case of the cot- 
ton mills, the discharge consists of hot, greas.y water from 
boilers and steam condensers, with the addition of sewage, the 
amount of which depends upon the number of operatives in the 
mill. Of a more harmful nature, however, is the discharge 
from other establishments (foundries, metal-working plants, 
and oil and soap factories), since it contains rust, poisonous 
chemicals, etc., in addition to sewage. In New Bedford there 
are also numerous mills and factories at a distance from the 
water's edge. Whether such concerns discharge into the harbor 
through private sewers or make use of the city sewers for the 
purpose is immaterial, since the ultimate destination of their 
wastes, in either case, is the bay. 

Pollution from New Bedford is more serious from the stand- 
point of health and sanitation than from the standpoint of the 
fish conservationist. While the pollution of Clark's Cove, for 
instance, may not be sufficiently concentrated to kill marine 
fish forms, it may be present in adequate quantity to infect 
edible marine food forms, especially shellfish, although eels, 
flatfish and tautog might be infected. Nearly a score of fish- 
ermen dig ciuahaugs in close proximity to the sewer outlet in 
Clark's Cove. 

Previous to 1904 typhoid cases in New Bedford were sus- 
pected of having originated from shellfish dug in New Bedford 
Harbor. Consequently "in August, 1904, the taking of shell- 
fish was prohibited and rigidly enforced," etc. It appears, 
then, that New Bedford Harbor and Clark's Cove are portions 
of Buzzards Bay where direct pollution is adversely affecting 
the fisheries of the bay. 



70 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

The new sewage disposal system, when completed, will 
reduce the injurious effects of the New Bedford sewage, since 
it will lessen the cjuantity emptied into the harbor, where it 
is but slowly diluted, and will discharge it into the bay in 
such place and manner that it will be harmless soon after it 
leaves the pipe. 

Fairhaven discharges sewage from 6 sewers into New Bed- 
ford Harbor. The amount of such sewage is probably not 
excessive, but there is no method of determining readily the 
exact amount. Some half-dozen private residences on the 
lowTF harbor have sewer pipes \Ahich are generally in use 
during the summer season only. 

The most noticeable evidence of direct pollution in Fair- 
haven is the case of the Atlas Tack Company. This large 
factory discharges a waste consisting of greasy water, rust and 
spent vitriol into a small creek (Crooked Creek), down which 
it flows for one-third of a mile. It is only slightly diluted when 
it enters the bay in what may be called Sconticut Cove. 

Misuse of Tributary Streams. 

Investigation also shows that the bay fisheries have probably 
been impaired through the employment of the tributary 
streams for purposes other than fishing, which have inter- 
fered with the river fisheries. The significance of this per- 
version of streams is made clear when the intimate relation 
between bay fisheries and river fisheries is explained, and the 
dependence of bay fisheries upon ri\-er fisheries set forth. 

By "river fisheries" is meant white perch, striped bass, 
smelt, shad and especially alewife fisheries. These fishes, 
which frequent the rivers periodically, serve a twofold economic 
purpose, — they are a food for man and also for carnivorous 
marine fishes, such as bluefish, squeteague, pollock and mack- 
erel, which are unquestionably attracted to the mouths of 
rivers by them. Therefore, if anything happens which de- 
creases the number of river fishes, it decreases the quantity 
of food available for carnivorous fishes. The further result 
is that the carnivorous fishes, upon the failure or disappearance 
of their food supply in one region, leave that region for other 
localities where food is more plentiful. 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 71 

Years ago it was patent that the bay fisheries were de- 
clining at an alarming pace. Testimony is also available which 
indicates that all kinds of river fisheries have fallen off, — 
perch, smelt, shad, but most noticeably the alewife. It is 
extremely probable that Buzzards Bay fisheries decreased coin- 
cidently with and because of the decline of the river fisheries. 
Not only has this decline resulted directly in a loss of food 
fish and revenue to persons engaged in the river fisheries, but 
it has also indirectly, but none the less surely, caused a de- 
crease in the quantity of and profit from the bay fish. 

One particular employment of the Buzzards Bay streams 
which has interfered with their fisheries is their use for water 
power, although, in several instances, the use of the water 
in connection with cranberry bogs has been injurious. The 
harmful feature in this connection is the presence of obstruc- 
tions (dams) and these dams, due to the absence of fish ways, 
are impassable to fish in their journeys to and from the spawn- 
ing grounds. This has resulted in the alewives spawning 
below the obstructions or dams in places unfavorable for the 
development of the spawn. Repeated seasons of this sort of 
treatment have made it impossible for the alewives to main- 
tain their numbers, and have removed all possibility of their 
increasing them. Due to the persistence of the alewife, a few 
have managed to reach suitable places, and therefore it has 
been possible of late years to behold a few schools in each 
stream in the spring. However, in most streams they have 
greatly decreased in number, and from some they have com- 
pletely vanished. 

The Development of Buzzards Bay. 

In the light of present day knowledge, the fishing resources of 
Buzzards Bay may be advantageously developed along certain 
lines which, if correctly applied, should yield results for the 
benefit of the fisheries of the entire New England coast. The 
essential lines of development to which attention should be 
given are, first, its reservations as a spawning ground; second, 
an increase in the facilities for natural food production, which 
induce fish to enter the bay; third, the development of certain 
forms of commercial industry for the extermination of pre- 



72 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

daceous fish, and for comniercial benefits accruing to the 
fishermen; fourth, Federal control of the situation with regard 
to the trapping of fish in Rhode Island waters at the entrance 
to Buzzards Bay; fifth, the development of the oyster fishery 
of Buzzards Bay in simulation of that fishery in Long Island 
Sound; sixth, the re-establishment of the alewife fisheries, and 
the development of the streams and ponds connected with the 
tidal waters of the bay. 

Rescrvotion. 

The time is approaching when there will l)e reservations 
made for the spawning grounds of the migratory fish of the 
ocean, as for the migratory birds. Certain areas along the 
Atlantic coast which are prolific in food, and afi'ord natural con- 
ditions suitable for the spawning and reproduction of various 
species of fish, will be set aside as reservations, and fish frequent- 
ing these waters will be protected. With the decrease in all 
species of fish it is apparent that some course similar to this 
will have to be pursued by the Federal government, and it is 
also apparent that such action must be taken in the near 
future. Therefore, with regard to Buzzards Bay it should be 
the aim of Massachusetts to set a precedent for future Federal 
legislation governing the migratory fish. It is to be admitted 
that such action in one part of the Atlantic coast will be of 
little practical value to the fisheries as a whole for the time 
being, but it should prove an inestimable benefit as indicating 
advance toward proper regulation. In considering the reserva- 
tion of Buzzards Bay as a spawning ground for fish, it should 
be considered from tlie viewpoint of the infallibility of general 
principles of reservation, and whether they should be extended 
to other waters. 

In formulating such a principle for Buzzards Bay considera- 
tion should be made of the species which spawn in the bay, 
and whether these fish spawn elsewhere, as Buzzards Bay 
is undoubtedly but a portion of a large spawning ground ex- 
tending along the entire southern New England coast. ^ How- 
ever, it is especially adapted for this purpose by reason of its 
shallow water, warmth, abundance of food, numerous estuaries 
and small rivers entering its headwaters. In fact, there are 



/ 



/ 



MAP OF COAST OF RHODE ISLAND AND MASSACHUSETTS 

The portion showing Narragansett Bay is an exact reproduction of a map 
accompanying t+ie Report of the Rhode Island Commissioners of Inland Fisheries for year 
1910 The porfion showing Buzzards Bay is drawn to sanne scale 

Location and number of fish traps in and about Narragansett Bay are indicated as 
follows : 

Green dots show traps (in shore and offshore) Summer of 1879. 

Red .. ,. 1898. 

Yellow ,. .. ■• (part of inshore and all offshore) . 1904 

Black .. (inshore. and offshore) ■■ . 1910. 

-^ Experimental Fish Traps . Buzzards Bay. 19131915. 




i 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 73 

few if any places so naturally adapted for such a purpose as 
Buzzards Bay, and as a reservation its influence upon the pro- 
tection of fish should be of great importance. It is our opinion 
that, with special modification in regard to certain types of 
fish, Buzzards Bay is more important to the fisheries as a 
spawning ground than for immediate gain from a commercial 
standpoint. The testimony of Vinal Edwards of the United 
States Bureau of Fisheries, who has been engaged for twenty- 
one years in collecting young of the various species of fish in 
Buzzards Bay, is of special consideration. From his investiga- 
tions, which date from the founding of the United States 
Bureau of Fisheries station, he is of the opinion — and un- 
questionably his opinion is of greater value than that of any 
living man at the present time, since he has been a practical 
fisherman in addition to conducting work for the Woods Holfe 
station — that Buzzards Bay is a breeding ground and good 
nursery for the various species of fish, such as scup, sea bass, 
tautog and warm-water fish. Buzzards Bay is probably the 
best arm of the sea for the spawning of fish along the New 
England coast, apparently more favorable than Narragansett 
Bay. 

Food Protection. 
Buzzards Bay is especially favored in possessing an abun- 
dance of microscopic food forms in its waters. These food 
forms have been demonstrated by Peck in the report of the 
United States Bureau of Fisheries in 1S93, which states that 
the temperature of the water of the bay in general is several 
degrees higher than is that of Vineyard Sound, and that in 
the upper portion of the bay brackish water is formed in 
the numerous inlets and estuaries, allowing a mixture of fresh 
and salt water microscopic forms to mingle with a third kind 
found in brackish water alone. Thus we have, in the upper 
region of the bay, an area particularly favorable for the growth 
and development of small fish of commercial importance, and 
also of small fish which serve as food for the larger fish, the 
former feeding on the floating microscopic material. The result 
of the large quantity of microscopic food also affects the large 
commercial fish, as these fish frequent the waters for the pur- 
pose of spawning and rearing their young, and likewise to prey 



74 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 

upon those species of fish which serve as their food. Thus we 
have in logical sequence a direct relationship between the 
abundance of plankton food in Buzzards Bay and the abun- 
dance of commercial fish frequenting its waters. 

Nature has supplied these conditions. It is the duty of man 
to alter them in any way possible to increase the number of 
fish feeding in the bay. In case of a marked diminution of food 
forms there would also be a corresponding decrease in fish. It 
is impossible to tell whether there has been any great loss of 
fish food, but it is very apparent that there has been no in- 
crease, although no records are available. One fact that bears 
weightily upon the amount of fish food is the pollution enter- 
ing Buzzards Bay from various sources, particularly in the 
region of the Acushnet River. Pollution to such an extent as 
is the case here manifests itself directly upon the fish and in- 
directly upon the fish through the food. The pollution, as we 
have shown in another part of the report, has its immediate 
sources directly in the bay and its remote sources in polluted 
streams entering the bay. Likewise, the cranberry bogs upon 
streams emptying into the bay, the damming of streams, the 
institutions which empty their waste products into water 
which ultimately reaches the bay, the encroachment of houses, 
sewerage systems, town wastes and other factors of civilization, 
all have indirectly contributed to the greater or lesser extent in 
the diminution of the food supply for the fish. 

Therefore it should be realized that any pollution entering 
the bay should be carefully guarded against in the future, as 
the amount of available food will depend upon the extent to 
which the inroads of civilization are kept from infringing upon 
the natural conditions present. 

Not only is the food supply of the fish threatened, but like- 
wise the value of Buzzards Bay as a spawning ground, since 
young fish cannot live, eggs cannot develop and fish will not 
seek polluted waters for spawning purposes. For this reason 
in a large area in the vicinity of the Acushnet River, one of the 
most polluted streams in the State, fish can never spawn, and 
though this area was once of importance as a breeding ground 
it no longer is of any particular value. The conditions existing 
in this part of the bay can perhaps never be adequately re- 



1916.] HOUSE — No. 1775. 75 

moved, but they can be confined to their present scope, and 
suitable provisions should be made restricting pollution to 
places already affected. 

Oyster Fishery. 

The development of the oyster grounds in Buzzards Bay is a 
matter of interest to the Commonwealth as a whole. At the 
present time these oyster grounds are situated along the shores, 
chiefly in the upper waters in the towns of Wareham and 
Bourne, and consist of small grants worked largely by individ- 
ual oystermen. However, the deeper waters of the bay and 
those far out from shore offer possibilities for development 
of an extensive oyster industry similar to that now carried 
on in Long Island Sound. Conditions in Buzzards Bay are 
such as to respond admirably to oyster propagation on a large 
scale. The two factors preventing such an undertaking at the 
present time may only be overcome by large capitalization. 
The presence of starfish in Buzzards Bay would necessitate the 
expenditure of a great deal of labor, and the continual use of 
boats to protect the grounds from this enemy, and in many 
cases the bottom would have to be prepared in various ways 
with shells and gravel before oysters could be planted. Such 
difficulties have been surmounted in other places, and there is 
no reason why such methods may not find application here. 
As a preliminary, a survey should be made of the bottom of 
the bay. Then favorable places should be plotted and charted 
by experts, after which suitable inducements should be offered 
to large oyster companies to take up ground in more exposed 
and deeper waters, and to individuals and to small corpora- 
tions to take the more accessible ground. By suitably regulat- 
ing this business it might be made a benefit and a paying asset 
to the Commonwealth. 

The question of pollution again is to be contended with in 
the case of the oyster industry as with other fisheries at the 
present time. ' It is absolutely essential to the oystermen that 
they shall be able to guarantee the purity of their products 
without dissimulation, and for this reason all pollution of what- 
ever nature should be eliminated. 



76 FISH AND FISHERIES. [Feb. 



The Ale wife Fishery. 

One of the most essential considerations in a discussion of 
the fisheries of Buzzards Bay should be that of the entire re- 
construction of the alewife fisheries. As is shown in the report 
upon the alewife fisheries, the alewufe is no less valuable as a 
bait than it is as a food, and it has a very important bearing 
upon other fisheries of Buzzards Bay. The small alewife not 
only is a food for the bass, pickerel and other species in fresh- 
water ponds, but when it descends to the ocean it attracts to 
the vicinity of the stream large quantities of bkiefish, sque- 
teague, pollock and other fish which prey upon them, both 
small and adult. Therefore the opinion that the alewife fish- 
eries are not only mere local assets is well grounded, as the 
regulation of these fisheries has a far-reaching effect upon other 
fisheries of the Commonwealth, and for the benefit of the fish 
consumers it should be conserved. 

The causes leading to the diminution of the alewife fisheries 
may be briefly summarized as overfishing, dams and obstruc- 
tions of various natures which prevent the passage of fish up 
rivers, the presence of cranberry bogs, deforestation, pollution, 
and inadequate, or rather ineffectual, laws which have gov- 
erned these fisheries. 

The solution of the alewife question lies rather in State than 
in town control. The foremost essential is that a suflScient 
number of alewives be allowed access to the spawning grounds. 
If this is accomplished each year, and there are no obstructions 
to passage to and from these spawning grounds, the alewife 
fishery is bound once more to rehabilitate itself. Therefore 
methods for the re-establishment of alewife fisheries in the dif- 
ferent streams entering Buzzards Bay should be conducted 
along the following lines: — 

First, by the removal of all obstructions of various natures 
now blocking the streams and preventing the passage of fish to 
the ponds for spawning. 

Second, by the maintenance of suitable fish ways for passage 
over dams and cranberry bogs. 

Third, by the elimination of polluting material of all kinds. 

Fourth, by having closed seasons on alewives for certain 



1916.1 HOUSE — No. 1775. 77 

periods of years, until the fisheries are once more in statu quo, 
when suitable provisions for catching them may be made. 

Fifth, by the passage of laws properly regulating the leasing 
of alewife fisheries. 

Sixth, by artificially stocking certain streams with spawning 
alewives. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



002 870 161 5 



